In article , Larry McMahan
wrote:

LSU Grad of '89 writes:

: I just can't identify with it. I LIKE knowing I've done tests and
: ultrasounds and stuff to make sure - with modern technology - that my baby
: is progressing fine. I just don't believe that a midwife can catch
: everything - right ?

1. Did you know that there is no benefit to be shown from routine
ultrasound. Ultrasound has only proven beneficial when looking for
specific indications. It is grossly overused.

No argument with that, but for those of us who haven't cultivated a
distrust in medical science, it can be reassuring. And it's not clear
what you mean by "specific indications." Our ultrasound involved a
bunch of specific measurements, which we enthusiastically asked a lot
of questions about.

out of the studies VERY STRONGLY is that the rate of complicaitons for
planned hospital births is much higher than for planned home births.

Mainly because pregnancies with identified risks for complications are
planned for hospital birth.

B. Read one of Henci Goer's books: "The Thinking Woman's Guide to a Better
Birth" is aimed primarily at birthing women who want to know what the best
and safest way to birth is, but it also contains plenty of references to
the medical studies that back up its conclusions. "Obstetric Myths versus
Research Realities" is aimed more at the medical professional, and contains
strong evidence based on the medical research why certian common procedures
should or should not be done.

I don't think lsugo89 said that nobody should do natural birth. We did
a planned hospital birth (with a midwife), but we read a lot about the
stuff you refer to--and we discussed them rationally with our midwives.
Some things we changed, some things we were reassured about.

I think either of these routes would give you the objective information to
be able to speak soundly on this subject.

See, it just sounds like she'd have to voice your opinion on order to
"speak soundly."

1. This issue has been discussed on this newsgroup many times. If you take
a women who has experience both a medicated birth with an epidural, and an
unmedicated birth, which do you think that woman will say that she preferred.
At least 95% of the mothers on mkp who have done both say they would go
natural in an instant. I am sure you will get not a few replies to this

Actually, our labor nurse said exactly the opposite--she had 2
unmedicated and 1 with an epidural, and she said the epidural was the
better experience.

2. Numerous studies have shown that the epidural anesthesia passes from the
mother to the babies bloodstream, and that babies who are born to moms with
epidurals have lower apgar scores, are more morbid, have more difficulty
breastfeeding, and in general do not respond as quickly or well.

My wife had an early epidural and the did a couple bolus' during labor.
Our daughter scored 9.9 apgar and breastfed like a champ. I don't
disagree that statistically epidurals are more likely to produce those
problems, but that's not the same as what you're stating.

Unfortunately you have a view of midwives that is straight out of the middle
ages. What you do not know is how modern and professional they are, and
how much the obstetric process has actually increased risks by the
inappropriate
overuse of technology. I suggest that you do some objective reading on the
subject before becoming subject to such unfounded fears.

I agree that many fears about home natural midwife birth are unfounded
and irrational, but there's plenty of axe grinding on both side of the
issue. And I doubt that a woman who has faith mainly in one side would
do very well in the opposite. Knowing a lot about both approaches is
probably the best strategy

APS
also an LSU grad of 1989 :-)