Unassisted Birth Rights

[Nataliejayne85]

Hi!
I was wondering if anyone could direct me to what my rights are to have an unassisted birth in reality.
I met a nurse yesterday who very bluntly said it was illegal to which I informed her it wasn't!
I am not very far along and I am already being wound up by the medical profession, I don't mind being given the information but I feel that I am being bullied which is why I am relucent to have even midwife present (though may consider if funds allow an indepentant midwife but as I don't want to be checked, I don't want to be causing trouble for a midwife RE her legal responsibilties and requirements). Also having experienced bad medical practice in the past I know saying NO doesn't mean NO to everyone and I do not want to be worrying about people not listening to me.
Also can I have other people in the house at the time of the birth or will they be held responsible if something went wrong, even if I refused their help?
Also anyone know any good legal people to draw up paperwork re unassisted birth if applicable?

Thanks

lulu yes the issue is with freebirthing but the OP also says that if she had enough money she would think of getting a IM. Surely giving evidence to support this would help her make a better decision as to the safety of her and her baby. I am not telling her to freebirth...I too think with no knowledge in her case of labor and birth, post partum care that she is better off with a Home birth with a IM???

Scientific evidence is not 'fact' - I'm sure there are any number of research reports supporting /rejecting various hypotheses regarding outcomes with home birth etc.

No one is saying homebirth is 'bad' some friends have had good experiences this way. But freebirthing is something different. Any data on this is, I should imagine, badly skewed because people giving birth alone are a self selecting sample - birth too fast to access medical care. And in those circumstances labour is probably straightforward.

I could never condone freebirthing I think it is naive stupidity carried out by spoiled westerners. But a woman has rights over her body so she should be allowed to get on with it.

i have not made any personal digs, chellesgirl. you're the one who seems very angry on here, tbh, anc clearly the feelings surrounding the hours after your baby's birth are not resolved. and no wonder, if you think a midwife deliberately left your baby to choke and suffer, if you think that she falsified medical records and if in the course of a six page response to your queries it became apparent that the hospital was not prepared to take any action against that person. did PALs not help you to pursue it?

Chellesgirl - you seriously have issues with your use and interpretation of research but as you are ignoring the query I raised on the other thread about unnassisted births, i'll take issue with it here. If at any point during your training, you submitted an assignment detailing statistics collected 35 years ago, it would in all probability fail. Unless it was an absolutely classic piece of research, widely quoted and used as a basis for clinical practice. You need to look for up to date information and statistics based on CURRENT practices. Ante natal care and monitoring including scans have made a huge impact on the pre birth diagnosis and management of some of the complications mentioned in your source for example. You are very passionate about what you think is the 'right' way for a birth to happen, but if you want to be taken seriously and indeed are able to practice SAFELY you need to build a professional approach based on all of the facts, not just the random ones which happen to suit your own argument. Have a look at NCT stats for homebirth v hospital outcomes and PLEASE speak to your tutors about how you interpret research.

no they didnt they told me that too much time had passed to look into it...the chief exec sent me a letter to say that 'the NHS allow for a certain amount of time in which they have to respond to the complaint' ' I am sorry but in this case, to collect the evidence it has taken much longer than we anticipated' ' The head of midwifery will write to you about your concerns'. SO because NHS took too long to respond, me suffering with the reactional disorder and being depressed...led me to 'give up' until 18 months later when I finally got help for it...the Nurse pyschiatrist said I could re -open my case with AIMS but with regards to contacted the NHS then its most likely too late. I am still thinking about AIMS...whether or not opening a can of worms again would be any better for me, I dont know. And I cant persue a legal case with my solicitor against them as I am having treatment for a car accident last year and im not able to have a 'problem' with the hospital in question...

chelle, in all honesty, i think you are taking this personally, way too personally, i have not made digs at you, i have taken issue with a couple of points, same as you hvae with me. that is a healthy, robust debate

the OP does not just need to consider an IM, but an NHS hombirth too.

she needs some help to come to terms with her feelings, whihc are extreme, and that help can be got on the NHS.

evidence to support a homebirth with an IM should be more recent thatn 1976 data

as i posted earlier, the NCT published hteir findings re homebirth far more easily

homebirth.org.uk is a useful resource

as is AIMS.

but if the OP feels she is going to hav eto fight to get what she wasnts , she needs up to date and current information

recently, not easily !

dont worry I am working on ALL STATS for England re: homebirth and hospital birth...and will have answers when I have finished - for 2009 that is.

I too think she should 'consider' a NhS midwife...but with her feelings, and if she cant combat them, then an IM might be better for her. whats the difference with an IM to a NHS midwife apart from the fact she has to pay for it??? Still the same qualification, still a midwife and still can go into hospital if needs be.

Does it matter what other people's views are? I love to live in a society where we can have different views, different births, different family structures and different education for our children, rather than one size fits all.

I do recommend the IM route if you can afford it though and I certainly needed my gas and air for the home birth and I think whether I'd given birth or alone I'd have wanted it. Also I had all my ante natal care except a scan at home where I work so I saved a love of money from lost pay as I'm self employed and saw the same person each time but of course most peopleare employees so don't lose pay from having to attend appointments so that point woudln't apply.

there is a big difference btween and Im and NHS midwife. or why pay for one?

the continuity of care, one to one care, AN appts at your convenience, in your home , lasting as long as you ened them to last.. care throughout labour from teh same person, PN care from the same person..

"the continuity of care, one to one care, AN appts at your convenience, in your home , lasting as long as you ened them to last.. care throughout labour from teh same person, PN care from the same person.. " EXACTLY my reasons as to why she should consider an IM.
You get what you pay for...
And then you just said she should aslo consider an NHS M...why if she has the money???when she can get all the great support from one person and be happy with the end result (if its a good one).

ive not said she should discount eitehr option

you said , "I too think she should 'consider' a NhS midwife...but with her feelings, and if she cant combat them, then an IM might be better for her. whats the difference with an IM to a NHS midwife apart from the fact she has to pay for it??? Still the same qualification, still a midwife and still can go into hospital if needs be."

so i said what the differences are !

i am finding this too hard work for a sunday afternoon

the OP has not even come back to the thread.

I have only very vaguely followed this thread so I'm not sure whether someone has pointed out what I think is a hugely significant difference between an IM and an NHS midwife - the lack of insurance that an IM has.

I'm having a planned NHS homebirth and I've had all antenatal care since 25 weeks with the same midwife, in the comfort of my own home. My shortest appointment has been 45 mins, and appointments involve cups of tea and very supportive chats which are immensely reassuring to me as a first timer (and I have absolutely no "issues" with hospitals, and in fact conceived via IVF, I just strongly feel that as a low risk pregnant woman my own home is the best place to labour and birth in unless something, eg meconium in my waters, indicates otherwise).

I looked into an IM, but the lack of insurance is a very big thing for me. I absolutely don't expect anything to go wrong, but if it did then I'd expect recourse to compensation in the same way I would against any type of medical person/doctor/dentist. With an IM this isn't an option.

Sorry Chellesgirl but any research in this area from 1976 is totally irrelevant now.

In 1976 there were no ultrasound scans, and hospital practice was very different.

Also even in terms of current stats I'm not sure it would be able to draw any useful stats from the figures. This is because the sort of women who considers a homebirth is different say from the sort of women who wants a hospital birth. You'd have to look at 2 groups of women (with equal split in each group for first time mothers etc) ademantly wanting midwife lead care in hospitals vs homebirth women.

I know lots of people booked in to hospital MLU saying things like "I'll try it for the few hours and if the baby hasn't come I'll move and have epidural". Clearly their outcomes are going to be different that homebirthing women.

Just having a look through this, got to say Why is Chellesgirl so defensive? It's not going to help anyone.

my friend had her 3rd and 4th babies at home before the midwifves arrived.
3rd was delivered by her DH and 4th was delivered by herself.
She rang for the midwife an hour before both times but they didn't come in time.
Paramedics were the first on the scene both times.

Don't know why this happened twice, maybe the midwives in our area are not good at getting moving quick enough? We live in the centre of a big city, 5 mins from the hospital!

Caitni, my independent midwives did have insurance (but that was 11 years ago, not sure about now and I know there have been huge difficulties for IMs to get it) and by the way many many things go wrong with births but the doctor or midwife is not responsible of course. Birth is a risky thing. Just because the baby is hurt during birth doesn't mean the midwife is to blame.

Interseting point that if the baby is born with brain damage because the mother chose an unattended home birth and that could be proved whether the child could sue the mother for damages perhaps via a divorcing husband etc. Possible if the mother has any assets I suppose.

Right I would just like to point out to the OP that you dont wanna birth in Birmingham this is my trust where I gave birth

I am not shocked and aitch you might wanna see why I feel like this after my expereince.

Xenia IM can not get insurance anymore.

Is anyone saying that unassisted birth is 'just as safe'??

Also I don't think it's fair to declare that unassisted birth is foolish, anymore than choosign to bottlefeed is foolish, we all know formula replacement increases risks of all sorts of deadly diseases and sudden infant death syndrome.
Of course unassisted birth has risks too, your cervix may need manually pushing back over the head to let baby through, a simple thing, but with no midwife baby would be stuck and could die. Mother is less likely to know how to massage baby's heart back into rythym if needed or how to clear throat and do crp.

People do things everyday that are risky though, putting baby in a different bedroom increases SIDS risk, tell those parents they're foolish too.

Comparing formula feeding to unassisted birth is absolutely ridiculous. Get real.

I'm rarely surprised by anything I read on mumsnet but comparing the risk of freebirthing to formula feeding? Probably one of the stupidest not to say insulting things I have read.

Have you looked into how many deaths formula causes globally, not to mention increasing risk of childhood leukimia, why have westerners got such massive breast cancer rates.
And putting baby in nursery to sleep and bottle feeding doubles sudden infant death syndrome.

You think these facts are 'ridiculous' because it's normal to take those risks here and people excuse those risks.
Someone comes along with a different more riskier way of giving birth and theyre called foolish, stupid etc..

You need to get real and look at evidence.

MAybe people who have not much worth while to say of their own are the ones throwing around 'your stupid' type posts.

It is insulting to the OP to call of the things it has been called, that's my point.
Yes it's risky, so are many 'normal' practises.

am trying to formulate a coherent, rational response , and am failing

yes, formula feeding can lead to an increase in infections and infant mortality. but in the western world, with access to clean water and sterile equipment, it is really quite safe. it would be more foolish and dangerous to feed a newborn cow's milk or coffeemate, that would be foolish and dangerous.

a woman who avoids antenatal care and does not have a MW at her birth is running a greater risk of something catastrophic happening.

formula feeding is a safe and relaible alternative to breast feeding

i don't believe free birthing is a safe and reliable alternative to a planned, attneded home birth