Home births 'as safe as hospital'

CEG · Apr 16, 2009

No surprise to me.

And yet ACOG continues to call homebirth dangerous while supporting a woman's right to choose elective cesarean section.

It's all about $$$$$.

HeartsOpenWide, RN · Apr 16, 2009

No surprise to me.
And yet ACOG continues to call homebirth dangerous while supporting a woman's right to choose elective cesarean section.
It's all about $$$$$.

And them thinking that midwives are going to take their place...their place? HA!

Exodus 15 The king of Egypt said to the Hebrew midwives, whose names were Shiphrah and Puah, 16 "When you help the Hebrew women in childbirth and observe them on the delivery stool, if it is a boy, kill him; but if it is a girl, let her live." 17 The midwives, however, feared God and did not do what the king of Egypt had told them to do; they let the boys live. 18 Then the king of Egypt summoned the midwives and asked them, "Why have you done this? Why have you let the boys live?" 19 The midwives answered Pharaoh, "Hebrew women are not like Egyptian women; they are vigorous and give birth before the midwives arrive." 20 So God was kind to the midwives and the people increased and became even more numerous. 21 And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families of their own.

Sorry dudes, midwives were doing it LONG before you were; yeah, Biblical times!

fmoore723 · Apr 16, 2009

Ironic someone posted this topic--not sure if any of you have seen this show, but Discovery Health has a new series/documentary (not sure which one) called 'Freebirthing'. It followed 3 women from the US and UK that have decided to birth at home without ANY medical intervention--MD or midwife. Scary to me, but to each their own I guess. Given my history, I would never do it....if you havent seen it, its very interesting...

Felicia

Elvish, BSN, DNP, RN, NP · Apr 16, 2009

I think the key is low-risk here. Nobody's encouraging homebirths for a 29-weeker, or for a woman w/ complete placenta previa. In healthy women having healthy pregnancies, it's really not a bad idea.

Plus, if your membranes are ruptured @ home, it's not nearly as big a deal as if they are ruptured in the hospital. :up:

fmoore723 · Apr 16, 2009

Just being devils advocate here, but cant a low-risk pregnancy become a high risk pregnancy at the drop of a dime these days??

Im also talking on behalf of the women who desire no medical intervention and seek no prenatal care.

Example--the 22 year old girl on the show I mentioned in my previous post had no prenatal care. She did her BP checks at one of those pharmacy machines and bought a fetoscope and learned to check the HR and placental location. At one point she thought the placenta was low lying--yet she still opted to seek no prenatal care and delivered at home. Delivery went smoothly as far as the baby was concerned, but 4 hours later she had not passed the placenta so went to the hospital--faced that scrutiny and easily delivered the placenta and went home. No further complications.

Just a thought...

Felicia

Elvish, BSN, DNP, RN, NP · Apr 16, 2009

Just being devils advocate here, but cant a low-risk pregnancy become a high risk pregnancy at the drop of a dime these days??

I really don't think these days are any different than other days - things can go bad, but giving birth at home attended by a skilled practitioner is key. A skilled attendant can either a) pick up on small things and intervene before they become a problem; or b) transport to a hospital.

Placentas can abrupt - but most don't. Placentas can be retained - but most aren't. Women can hemorrhage - but most don't (especially when their uterus isn't tired from Pit infusions). BPs can become problematic - but most don't. I know you are just playing devil's advocate, but it's my opinion that we go way overboard in the spirit of 'just in case'. We don't trust women's bodies nearly enough.

fmoore723 · Apr 16, 2009

Sorry for the "these days" comment, it wasnt meant to differentiate between any time periods.

And I completely agree with your comment about having a skilled practioner and regarding complications, but this whole "Freebirthing Movement" as theyre calling it has me concerned.

Felicia

morte, LPN, LVN · Apr 16, 2009

Just being devils advocate here, but cant a low-risk pregnancy become a high risk pregnancy at the drop of a dime these days??
Im also talking on behalf of the women who desire no medical intervention and seek no prenatal care.
Example--the 22 year old girl on the show I mentioned in my previous post had no prenatal care. She did her BP checks at one of those pharmacy machines and bought a fetoscope and learned to check the HR and placental location. At one point she thought the placenta was low lying--yet she still opted to seek no prenatal care and delivered at home. Delivery went smoothly as far as the baby was concerned, but 4 hours later she had not passed the placenta so went to the hospital--faced that scrutiny and easily delivered the placenta and went home. No further complications.
Just a thought...
Felicia

well, she may not have had PROFESSIONAL prenatal care, but she certainly had care, even if it was self provided, and appropriately sought assistance. and at 22 years old if any one had referred to me as a child i would have had a few words for them

Elvish, BSN, DNP, RN, NP · Apr 17, 2009

"Freebirthing Movement" as theyre calling it has me concerned

I see what you are saying now. :)

I personally wouldn't give birth by myself - not on purpose, anyway - but the people I've seen/read about that do it have done the research. I've found a new saying that I really like and have been using it a lot lately - it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg if people want to do it. I just want women and their babies to be safe, and 99 times out of 100, they'll be safe.

Point taken, though.

CEG · Apr 17, 2009

Sorry for the "these days" comment, it wasnt meant to differentiate between any time periods.
And I completely agree with your comment about having a skilled practioner and regarding complications, but this whole "Freebirthing Movement" as theyre calling it has me concerned.
Felicia

Remember that many of these women are driven to have unassisted births because they cannot get appropriate low risk care. In many areas a woman's only options are to birth alone or to have an OB who will "require" continuous EFM, IV, lithotomy, episiotomy, etc.

It sounds like the woman described had appropriate screening and sought medical advice as needed.

HeartsOpenWide, RN · Apr 17, 2009

Sorry for the "these days" comment, it wasnt meant to differentiate between any time periods.
And I completely agree with your comment about having a skilled practioner and regarding complications, but this whole "Freebirthing Movement" as theyre calling it has me concerned.
Felicia

Well that is a topic all and of itself for another thread. When they say home birth is just as safe as hospital birth they are talking about home birth attended by a skilled attendant; not the freebirthers...but it is people like these, and those that donot plan on having a home birth but it turns out that way for whatever reasons (i,e, precipitous birth) that get included in the home birth statistics screw the home birth statistics up. PLANNED home birth attended by a skilled attendant is just as safe (or safer IMO...many of the complications that low risk women "suddenly develop" in the hospital is caused by the interventions---many uselessness--that are used in hospitals) than hospital birth for LOW RISK women.