Great to hear some positive news about home birthing in the mainstream media!

[norktasticninja]

Here. The findings are nothing new TBH but its great to see some positive news about home birth.

The study was conducted in the Netherlands (where I live) and there is just one tiny inaccuracy I feel I must mention as it probably has a lot to do with the relatively high rate of transfer to hospital stated (1/3 of births).

There is no pain relief available at home here. G&A isn't used at all (either at home or in hospital) and TENS is pretty much unheard of. The article mentions transfers to hospital "if the mother required more effective pain relief in the form of an epidural", in actual fact transfer is necessary for any form of pain relief.

I found being in the consultant-led unit with the much maligned continuous monitoring more relaxing than being in the midwife-led unit with hourly checks from the mw. I wonder how much it's the 1-1 care rather than the environment that appeals about hb? obviously excepting circumstances such as yours peachy re:fast birth/care of other children.

I think good care would help massively: after beuing rushed in with a fit 9wirnessed by MW) and a BP 20 over my admittance level (which IIRC is 20 over abse PG adjusted level) I was told by my Ob that I was 'anxious' not suffering eclampsia .

I wasn't, BTW. Proteinuri isn't a sign of that as far as I know.

There were also lots of other tings about my hosiptal stay that ame me ulikely toever repeat by choice.... no df food for example and when I gave in through hunger I ended up with severe diarrhoea and pain as bad as labour as a result, fab choice , plus thw hole No Dh due to childcare thing. I did hire a Doula as if i was rsuhed in I didnt want to be there scared thinking I was alone...... lovely though she is she isn't my Dh, for me anyway.

Pus I can make it myself to the hospital in 10 minutes, blue light would be half that no doubt. far less than the cock up at ds1's delivery.

Absolutely woman need to be made aware of what happens when things go wrong- in childbirth as well as in HB, VABC, epidural, all birth choices which do carry attached risks- but if they have that info and still make that choice then their choice should be respected as right for them. I didn't feel that at all, I felt that people were reading my posts at that time and thinking they knew better than me, actually tehy didn't, they don't know me at all. they don't know that when I fitted after ds1's delivery I was so scared of speaking to a harsh MW that i told nobody ever but Dh would ahve forced it if he had been there; they don't know that I agree to almost anything if told by an authority figure because I am scared of being challenged (a legacy of my childhood); that I cannot have an epidural due to scarring on my back but wouldnt have told anyone through that same fear and it wasn't in my notes.........

I strongly beleived it was right for me and still do, indeed the fact that fith birthsd are not allowed as HB's is a finalising factor to my not having any more. I know if it ahd all gone balls up[ that I amde the decision taking that risk into account.

So absoolutely bad experiences need to be shared, but there is a thing on here where any woman who has a good HB experience can be talked down in a 'well look what happened to me' kind of way. That'sno better either; reality is represented by having real experiences both ways available.

And as I said, with ds4 it was the safest option: MW agreed, eventually Ob agreed. I had 35 minutes frm knowing I was in labour to delivery, only the last 5 minutes aware it was 'too late'. Haviong HB as an option is important for peopleike me, and removing it would push more people into unassisted birthing which is in my view a far worse thing to do.

special2shoes - sorry if I was a bit sharp with you earlier in the thread but I did find your remark a little trite. The word "unsubstantiated" was incorrect - what I meant (and I'm not sure that there is a single word that covers this) was that it is rare that you can put one outcome down to a single circumstance. I didn't read your post before it was withdrawn so don't know if this applies in your case.

On a more general point about safety, I had my first child in hospital and part of the reason I decided to have subsequent children at home was because the level of care was so bad once I had given birth. I was made to stay in overnight because I had apparent risk of haemorrhage but was then put in a side room and left, completely unmonitored and unchecked, for 13 hours (I was also given nothing to eat or drink because I had given birth too late to have dinner which, in retrospect, seems appalling since they were worried about blood loss). I felt that, at least if I had been at home, my husband might have noticed if I became ill and he could call an ambulance - no one would have known until 9am at the hospital.

We all weigh up the risks when we are fortunate enough to be able to choose how we would like to give birth and I think it is important to have unbiased information such as this Dutch study to help us do that. (For the sort of polemic and mud-slinging that is not needed, please see Melanie Reid in today's Times...)

foxytocin

' "least you can sue a hospital if something goes wrong."

Riven did you really mean to say that? '

What a stupid question to put to Riven! Why on earth shouldn't she want to sue someone if their act or ommision caused or vastly contributed towards damage to her child? In these circs wouldn't you want compensation to enable you to provide your dc with everything reasonably possible to enhance its life and make day to day living as straightforward and enjoyable as possible not only for dc but for the rest of the family as well? Am guessing that Riven wouldn't have spent compo money on diamonds and pearls rather she would put it to good use for dd's benefit. Home alterations, medical equipment, specialised wheelchairs, vehicles, petrol to medical appointments, accomodation close by whilst dd is in hospital, specialised food stuffs, play equipment and so the list is probably endless. compo would also help ensure that dd continues to be well looked after after she and dh are gone.

Sorry to answer for you Riven but the crapness of the q asked of you is just fucking astounding.

Should also add that i have had 2 great homebirths!

do midwives not have to take out some kind of malpractise insurance then? could the hospital they are attached to not be sued?

I am not trying to be ignorant, I am sure you will have checked this out, I just can't believe that they could give negligent care and not be liable just cos they weren't in an actual hospital building.

sueing takes years by the way, 9 years is quick

I guess I just assumed...

this is the kind of thing you never think about until you have to.

OTOH I wonder if because the NHS is the NHS, peopple are reluctant to sue - there was a woman in my postnatal group whose anaesthesia didn't work during a CS so she felt everything. She didn't want to sue so as not to put pressure on/deprive the NHS.

Although I am from a country with a similar medical system, my attitude is v different - I would have wanted to do something to make them think twice/take more care with other people - not let them get away with it.

Of course, you also need to have the time and energy to be able to do that - a luxury when you are coping with the fallout of a mega mishap.

Everyone - every single person I know - who had a dodgy birth and who had tried to get their notes has been told they've been 'lost'. Once I could understand, but every time????

If you ever have a dodgy birth get your notes photocopies before you leave hospital.

riven, did you have a meeting recently re your birth? did not a MW drop your DD?

surely the community MWs attending births are still under the remit of teh NHS and therefore can still be held to account under the same rules as in hosptial?

mrsturnip., that is good advice. i always tell women to ensure they get their notes before they indicate whether they will complain or take further action for those very reasons.

i see. sorry to drag it up again.

Tinsel, I was asking Riven a question in light of what the previous poster had said and her response to it. Not in the vein that you have misinterpreted it to mean.

I don't expect Riven to answer in light of her own circumstances but in the circumstance of the dialogue at hand.

to me the dialogue had a completely different meaning from the one you have drawn.

Please therefore reread the reallytired's post directly before riven's to see what was really the discussion at hand.

I would rather people leave gratuitous swearing out of a dialogue with me if you don't mind. I do like a good swearing session myself but I don't think it is helpful in this type of conversation, iyswim.

If you still draw the same conclusion, let me know and then I will tell you how I interpret what Reallytired had said and Riven's answer to it.

yeah the nhs trust are liable for their midwives. If the midwife allowed dd to hit the floor then to blame you for birthing too quickly would not get her very far, in this respect she failed in her duty of care to you and dd. In the face of horribly obvious medical negligence (i.e. a dropped baby) the the 'you going against medical advice' argument is irrelevant. I appreciate tho that your situation is doubtless much more complex than this and i am over simplifying. Much would doubtless be made of you choosing to birth at home and it can be exceptionally hard proving how and when damage was caused in birth cases. That said these things should not deter you against taking legal advice.

Have you spoken to solicitors riven? The nhs will tell you that you are doomed to fail cos they want you to believe this. You are also entitled to request dd's nhs notes. I can see tho that swiping them may help you to get an intact version of the file tho! A good solicitor should take the burden of any legal action off your shoulders. I totally understand your wish to get dd the best possible and latest pioneering treatments.

Have read posts again foxy but i can't see where you're coming from re me having misunderstood your point/question to riven. If you did not intend to insult Riven then fair enough (tho i and others may have read the post in a different way to how you say you intended it). I accept that have now come back and stated that this was not your aim.

I don't have much time these days to get into complex discussions so will not be retuening to our discussion, TT. thanks for your last post, as well.

In my view, Riven's post can seem to imply that one should opt for a hospital birth so that if something goes wrong she can sue. I am sure you and her would agree that a woman should make an informed choice about where is the best place to have her child and she may, in her own experience and particular pg decide a hospital is the best place, realising that giving birth in a hospital like giving birth at home carry their own unique risks. And that some of these risks are not what many women in the general public understand or expect them to be so a truly informed choice is harder to attain than we are generally led to believe.

The way Riven's post reads, it could also be construed that if the child is damaged in a hospital birth, as per the child that ReallyTired spoke about, then that is quite ok, as long as the parents can get compensation. And I know fully well that she would not expect someone to draw that conclusion especially in the light of her situation. Others reading an open forum may not be as broadminded as I, I suspect.

A third point, and I think it may already have been highlighted below but I dont' have the time to go look, is that having a home birth does not preclude a woman from suing the NHS if something goes wrong and she believes that they are responsible. Her post seems to suggest that because someone opts for a HB, legal recourse is out of the question if something goes wrong. Again, I don't think that is her intention but it can be construed as such.

riven to add to Tinsel's post at 19:28, did you say your baby hit the floor and then the midwife spent time trying to resuscitate the baby herself before calling for an ambulance? I would think that the order of behaviour from her part should have been, to get someone else in the room to call the ambulance while she worked on your baby.

or, call the ambulance first then start to work on the baby.

to get someone else in the room to call the ambulance immediately while before she worked on your baby.

asap after a head injury or was there a delay from when it happened because she was trying to resus herself and wasn't being successful so then asked you to phone ?

i know this may be neither here or there but sometimes when and the order of action is significant.