home birth

enigma wrote:
Ericka Kammerer wrote in
:

Grahame wrote:
Thats true, Im sure if my child died, I would blame myself
anyway, beyond reason.
But to me thats more of an unlikely situation, than
complications of childbirth.
However, *statistically*, that's not true. If you
start
from the baseline of normal, healthy women having normal,
healthy pregnancies, then the vast majority of
complications can either dealt with at home just fine or
give enough time to transport to deal with appropriately.

out of curiousity, how much time *is* 'time to deal with
appropriately'?

The general recommendation is that it's best to
be able to transport within 30 minutes.

on a related note, is it really that uncommon here in the US
to go into a hospital birth with a birth plan spelling out
exactly which interventions you will not allow, or things you
want done? i don't remember everything on mine, except no
drugs, no cutting the cord until all the blood drained, & that
i wanted Tom to help with the delivery. it had a whole page
worth of stuff though.
the OB nurse looked it over, said i could have everything
except Tom helping & it was fine. in the end though, the
doctor overrode the nurse & let Tom help. they did install a
hep lock after 17 hours of labor because i was dehydrating &
they are supposed to give an antibiotic 16 hours after the
water breaks... but the fluids & antibiotic were delivered by
robot & didn't show up until after the birth anyway
(apparently the poor robot got stuck on an elevator).
the point being that delivering in a hospital doesn't mean
you have to give up control.

Many hospitals in the US are exerting more control.
Many people find that their birth plans are not allowed
or are disregarded when the time comes. Many people don't
have enough flexibility in hospital or provider choice
(because of limited availability or insurance limitations)
so it's not always possible to ditch a provider if you
don't like the limitations.
By far, the overwhelming reason most women who
choose home birth choose it is to maintain more control.

Best wishes,
Ericka

wrote:
Hi,

It seems to me that women are having fewer home births now. I am
saddened by this and wonder why this is happening. Homebirth and
midwifery were resurected and fought for and protected for about the
last 25 years and we seem to be losing ground again. Of course, I
don't have studies or anything to base this on.......just observations
over the last five years especially. My thought: The big hospital
conglomerates are masterful at marketing fear about our bodies and
concealing their own inadequacies.

Any way I would love to be part of a discussion of this topic.

Well, as far as I can tell, home birth is *increasing* over what it was
in the 1970s. I had a home birth, and it was a wonderful experience.

I would say it's not the hospital conglomerates that are the problem,
but our society in general, and perhaps the medical model that
encourages fear of childbirth. When I was pregnant, and interviewing a
doctor about her being my baby's doctor, she herself was pregnant at
the time. She told me she supported my right to decide on a home birth,
but as a doctor, she saw or studied ALL THE THINGS THAT COULD GO WRONG
for her to be comfortable chosing to birth at home.

Compare that to my parents family doctor, who chose to her have *her*
last baby at home.
:-)

So when you focus on everything that can go wrong, OF COURSE people
think hospitals are safest.

Cathy Weeks

Jeff wrote:
wrote in message
ps.com...
Hi,

It seems to me that women are having fewer home births now. I am
saddened by this and wonder why this is happening.

If there is a problem with during birth, the time it takes to get to the
hospital could be deadly.

Jeff, the average "decision to incision" time is 30 minutes, and
whether you are waiting on a gurney outside the OR, or traveling in
your midwife's care breathing oxigen, has little differnce in th
outcome. The VAST majority of complications occur during stage one of
labor, in plenty of time to transfer to the hospital. Breech
presentation, meconium in the fluid, etc. And most complications that
can happen during 2nd stage - well, midwives are trained to handle most
of them just fine. The problem that happens during 2nd stage that will
result in the death of mother or baby unless something happens RIGHT
NOW is very, very rare - and occur about as commonly as
hospital-introduced infections or other hospital-occurring
complications that result in the death of mother or child. So yes,
there are babies and/or mothers who might die because of the decision
to birth at home. And there are a similar number of babies and/or
mothers who might die because of the decision to birth at the hospital.
Fortunately, both are rare situations (and I might add - the women or
babies who die because something is needed RIGHT NOW often would have
died no matter where they were. Women and babies do die at hospitals).

Of course, there are women who should birth at the hospital due to
various risk factors. It would be stupid to suggest otherwise.

Actually, a lot of hospitals have midwives assist in the deliveries.

Yes, and those midwives are bound by the rules of the hospital.
Continuous fetal monitoring, constant IVs, rules against laboring women
walking the halls, or moving about their rooms, prohibiting food and
drink during labor, no water births, etc. These are all rules that
have not been shown to help, and in many cases have been shown to
actually LEAD to complications.

However, I am glad homebirth rates are decreasing. The babies have more
trained professionals available in a hospital than at home.

Jeff, I'm really bothered by this. For women with low risk factors,
birthing at home is just as safe, and in some ways SAFER. First of
all, you need to consider more than just the health of the baby at
birth. The mother counts too. So for low-risk pregnancies, the
percentage of live and healthy babies is about the same at home as in
the hospital. But, the mothers have more c-sections to heal from, more
episiotomies (considered the most common unnecessary surgery in the
US), more infections. The babies are exposed to more drugs via the
pain medication, and due to infections they must be treated for. All of
these things have been shown to statistically decrease the success of
breastfeeding (I'm speaking in generalities here). So in the end...
even the babies might be less healthy.

That said, inselected low-risk cases, home delivery appears as safe as
in-hospital delivery, if emergent transport to a hospital is available.

So why are you glad to see it decreasing? The women who deliver at
home are pretty much always lower-risk women (midwives risk some women
out prior to delivery, and risk others out DURING labor).

Anecdote - my CNM practice was an independent practice. THey had two
OBs who came in once a month to see their 36-weekers to clear them for
a home birth - they went over the records, examined the women, all to
make sure the midwives hadn't missed anything. Assuming everything was
OK, the midwives would only do homebirths between 37 and 42 weeks
gestation, and assuming a WHOLE bunch of other things were ok (like no
meconium in the fluid, no breech presentation, etc) they'd do a home
birth. They recommended transfers if things looked funny during labor
- heartbeat problems with either mother or baby, etc. My understanding
is that this model is relatively common. Anyway, by 2001, their
practice (there were two of them) had delivered more than 3000 babies,
and about half of those were planned home births. They had a 7%
transfer rate (10% for first timers) and about a 5% c-section rate.
And they had never lost a baby or mother.

Personally, I think the best care is delivered by midwives in birthing
suites in hospitals, where there is good OB coverage and good emergency
neonatal care, when needed.

Yes and no. I agree to some extent - it was my second choice after a
home birth, but midwives in these situations are still bound by the
hospital rules, many of which are not actually good rules. I mentioned
a number of them above. It's also worth mentioning that from a germ
perspective, birthing suites or attached birth centers also have higher
rates of infection than do home births or free-standing birth centers.
You just cannot prevent those nasty germs that are in hospitals from
traveling to L&D wings. Doesn't matter how much cleaning is done, or
disinfectant is used, as long as you are mixing sick people and
birthing people, you will get higher rates of illness among the
birthing folks.

I agree with Erika - hospitals are not without risks, and most women
who are contemplating having a child do not know of those risks, and
hence cannot truely make an informed decision. That said, we are all
comfortable with differing types risks, and low-risk women should be
free to choose the location they are most comfortable with (becuase
comfort and peace of mind are VERY important to a good birth -if you
cannot relax, it's just that much harder to do!)

I've also found that doctors (and I know you are an MD) are not
terribly comfortable with situations that are out of their control. My
family-practice doctor (a WONDERFUL doctor for most stuff - I still
miss her - but alas I moved to a different state) was horrified by the
idea that I was contemplating a home birth because I had an "unproven
pelvis". Other than her Medschool training, she did not do births -
they had women go to an OBGYN for obstetrical and gynacologic care. So
she wasn't even particular experienced. Another doctor in that same
practice (another good doctor, I might add) told me that she had
learned too much about what could go wrong, to ever be confortable
hving a home birth herself. What was wierd, is that she had no
understanding of the statistics or practices surrounding home birth,
nor did she understand the risks associated with just being in a
hospital.

I think part of it is that doctors become doctors because they want to
help people - ie they want to take charge. A home birth represents a
situiation where some of the variables are less controlled, and I think
that's uncomfortable for them. I think the mentality is similar to the
husbands of laboring women who are just ... so scared because there's
nothing they can do to help (well, they can, but you know what I mean!)

Sorry for the long rant.

Cathy Weeks

Todd Gastaldo wrote:
Pregnant? To allow your birth canal to open an "extra" up to 30%, see
LADIES at the very end of this post.


BABIES DYING/MDs LYING

...AND ERICKA'S SORDID JOKE...

Ericka Kammerer is whining about people not being informed (see below)
- even as she supports prominent childbirth educator Henci Goer in
failing to inform women that MD-obstetricians are keeping birth canals
closed the "extra" up to 30% when babies get stuck - as they pull with
vacuums.

Todd,

I'm glad you are around to keep people informed on your crusade, but I
must take issue with this one. I think this was incredibly rude.

Ericka is one of our most valuable, and reasoned members of these
sites, and just because (unlike you) she doesn't have a one-track mind,
doesn't mean she is whining, nor does it mean she is guilty of
ommission.

You just lost a lot of credibility here.

Cathy Weeks

Ericka Kammerer wrote in
:

Many hospitals in the US are exerting more control.
Many people find that their birth plans are not allowed
or are disregarded when the time comes. Many people don't
have enough flexibility in hospital or provider choice
(because of limited availability or insurance limitations)
so it's not always possible to ditch a provider if you
don't like the limitations.

i actually had insurance when i had the baby. fortunately my
OB used the hospital i wanted because they have a regular
maternity ward *and* a birth center.
the birth center section is way more relaxed than the regular
maternity.

By far, the overwhelming reason most women who
choose home birth choose it is to maintain more control.

i was 47. i was pretty assertive
lee
--
Question with boldness even the existence of god; because if
there be
one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of
blindfolded
fear. - Thomas Jefferson

wrote:
Hi,

It seems to me that women are having fewer home births now. I am
saddened by this and wonder why this is happening. Homebirth and
midwifery were resurected and fought for and protected for about the
last 25 years and we seem to be losing ground again. Of course, I
don't have studies or anything to base this on.......just observations
over the last five years especially. My thought: The big hospital
conglomerates are masterful at marketing fear about our bodies and
concealing their own inadequacies.

Any way I would love to be part of a discussion of this topic.

I think you should feel blessed that you have the choice as to whether
or not you have a home birth. Many women never get the chance to
experience pregnancy and childbirth. Worrying about what type of birth
to have seems silly and incidental to many of us who are Primary
infertiles.

Personally I think anyone who takes the risk of homebirth is ****ing
nuts. But hey - that's just me.

-L.

Another thought here-one thing I've picked up repeatedly on the
Pre-Eclampsia and HELLP syndrome groups is that midwives do a better job of
picking up the early symptoms than OBs do, simply because usually you have
more contact with them, appointments are longer, and usually they're focused
more on the mother than on charting and record keeping. My perinatal center
used CNMs for monitoring and regular appointments during my second, ultra
high-risk pregnancy, and I feel that my CNM was a major help in getting a
pregnancy to 35 weeks and keeping things balanced and under control. I can
never have even a birthing center birth (I will always have to have
C-sections, and require a CCU and NICU for my and the baby's safety), let
alone a home birth, but the team approach with a midwife leading and an OB
and perinatologist on consultation (with the OB handling medication,
ordering tests and the like and the perinatologist reviewing periodically)
worked very well, and really helped make a horribly stressful pregnancy
much, much less stressful, especially compared to my first one where I
literally didn't see the same OB twice until I was 20 weeks along, and
barely recognized the guy when I ended up in the hospital at 22 weeks!

So, even if you end up with the worst case scenerio, if you're planning for
a midwife-led home birth, you'll probably have a pretty good standard of
care throughout the pregnancy, and have a much more relaxed, positive
experience during the pregnancy.

--
Donna DeVore Metler
Orff Music Specialist/Kindermusik
Mother to Angel Brian Anthony 1/1/2002, 22 weeks, severe PE/HELLP
And Allison Joy, 11/25/04 (35 weeks, PIH, Pre-term labor)

First things first...

MDs LYING/BABIES DYING...

Pregnant women: Please see LADIES: PREVENTION [in the URL at the end
of this post] below for a simple way
to help avoid c-sections and episiotomies...

MD-obstetricians are senselessly closing birth canals up to 30%. See
Gastaldo TD. Letter. Birth. 1992;19(4):230-1.

Babies are actually being vacuumed to DEATH - made to bleed to death
into their scalps - thousands per year (please check my math; see the
"Dr Hull" URL below)
- with MD-obstetricians senselessly KEEPING birth canals closed the
"extra" up to 30% as they literally vacuum/rip/separate baby scalps
from baby skulls...

See Dr. Hull made SOME changes I recommended, but he still
'forgets' those hematomas ABOVE the periosteum...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...f53c2204fce76e




CATHY, DO YOU DISAGREE THAT...

See below.

Todd Gastaldo wrote:

Pregnant? To allow your birth canal to open an "extra" up to 30%, see
LADIES at the very end of this post.


BABIES DYING/MDs LYING

...AND ERICKA'S SORDID JOKE...

Ericka Kammerer is whining about people not being informed (see below)
- even as she supports prominent childbirth educator Henci Goer in
failing to inform women that MD-obstetricians are keeping birth canals
closed the "extra" up to 30% when babies get stuck - as they pull with
vacuums.

Cathy Weeks replied:


Todd,

I'm glad you are around to keep people informed on your crusade,

#### Isn't it interesting that one must "crusade" to stop
MD-obstetricians from closing birth canals up to 30%, etc.?

#### The crime is so obvious - so massive - it would be surprising if
MD-obstetricians did not have "experts" to give out good info and
studiously ignore the massive MD crime.

but I
must take issue with this one. I think this was incredibly rude.


#### Sometimes telling the truth seems rude. Babies are dying/MDs are
lying. It was/is incredibly rude of Ericka to lie to support prominent
childbirth educator Henci Goer's bizarre failure to tell pregnant women
that MD-obstetricians are keeping birth canals closed the "extra" up to
30%. For Ericka to whine that people aren't being informed is
hypocrisy.

Ericka is one of our most valuable, and reasoned members of these
sites, and

#### Unfortunately Ericka is neither valuable nor reasoned in this
matter. In this matter, Ericka reminds me of NO CIRC's Marilyn Milos,
RN - another "most valuable and reasoned" person. Marilyn toils
tirelessly to end mass infant penis ripping and slicing - but oddly -
Marilyn failed to call attention to a key point - American medicine
lying - using phony "babies can't feel pain" neurology. Ultimately,
Marilyn voted not to have NO CIRC nurses file mandatory suspected child
abuse reports - even as she sold bumper stickers which read "Child
abuse begins with circumcision." The mass infant penis ripping and
slicing that Marilyn "opposes" continues.

just because (unlike you) she doesn't have a one-track mind,

#### A one-track mind is MANDATORY when children are being abused.
Children are being abused en masse and Ericka is covering/lying for
prominent childbirth educator Henci Goer who is failing to call
attention to the fact that MD-obstetricians are keeping birth canals
closed the "extra" up to 30% when babies get stuck.

#### Maybe Ericka and Henci are good friends and that is the reason for
Ericka's whining hypocrisy?

doesn't mean she is whining, nor does it mean she is guilty of
ommission.


#### No, I still say she is whining about parents not being informed
even as she lies to help conceal a prominent childbirth educator's
failure to inform.

You just lost a lot of credibility here.

Cathy Weeks

##### Sorry you feel that way. If you see error in my writing, please
point it out - preferably publicly. It is ERICKA who is lying and
covering up for Henci Goer's bizarre failure to inform parents - even
as she (Ericka) hypocritically whines about parents not being informed.

#### As I indicated in my post (you snipped this)...

"Babies are actually being vacuumed to DEATH - made to bleed to death
into their scalps - thousands per year (please check my math someone?)
- with MD-obstetricians senselessly KEEPING birth canals closed the
"extra" up to 30% as they literally vacuum/rip/separate baby scalps
from baby skulls... "

See Dr. Hull made SOME changes I recommended, but he still
'forgets' those hematomas ABOVE the periosteum...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...f53c2204fce76e

#### You also snipped this:
"This crime should be REPORTED not ignored...Yes, Ericka puts out a lot
of good information - but she is engaging in
a grave act of omission...Women shouldn't have to ask for the "extra"
up to 30%....Most women don't know to ask...Law enforcement needs to
address this obvious crime."
http://groups.google.com/group/misc....2cb54e1443a9a7

CATHY, DO YOU DISAGREE THAT...


#### ....a massive crime is being committed -
complete with MD cover-up lies? I say again: a one-track mind is
MANDATORY when children are being abused. Children are being abused en
masse and Ericka is covering/lying for a prominent childbirth educator
who is failing to call attention to the fact that MD-obstetricians are
keeping birth canals closed the "extra" up to 30% when babies get
stuck.

#### I hope Ericka keeps putting out all that good information - but I
think she needs to end her lying hypocrisy.

#### MD-obstetrician experts should stop THEIR lying too. Their lies
are whoppers. See "Dents in babies' skulls" URL below.

Excerpted from: MDs lying/Babies dying: Cathy, do you disagree that...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...6fdb51ddea0aa1

enigma wrote:
Ericka Kammerer wrote in
:

Many hospitals in the US are exerting more control.
Many people find that their birth plans are not allowed
or are disregarded when the time comes. Many people don't
have enough flexibility in hospital or provider choice
(because of limited availability or insurance limitations)
so it's not always possible to ditch a provider if you
don't like the limitations.

i actually had insurance when i had the baby. fortunately my
OB used the hospital i wanted because they have a regular
maternity ward *and* a birth center.
the birth center section is way more relaxed than the regular
maternity.

By far, the overwhelming reason most women who
choose home birth choose it is to maintain more control.

i was 47. i was pretty assertive

I can be pretty assertive as well, but didn't
particularly want to *have* to fight my way through
labor to get what I wanted. It was much nicer knowing
that we were all on the same page. Being able to relax
is very helpful in labor ;-)

Best wishes,
Ericka

Donna Metler wrote:
Another thought here-one thing I've picked up repeatedly on the
Pre-Eclampsia and HELLP syndrome groups is that midwives do a better job of
picking up the early symptoms than OBs do, simply because usually you have
more contact with them, appointments are longer, and usually they're focused
more on the mother than on charting and record keeping.

...*and* they can't afford to miss these sorts of
things. They have both more motivation to find these things
and more data on which to hone their intuition. I think
many people really underestimate the value of continuity
of care. I went through two different models of care,
even with homebirths. For the first two, I was with a
small practice where the same two midwives were at all
prenatals as well as the entire birth. For the third,
I was with a larger practice where I rotated through
several midwives during prenatals, though I had a single
midwife for the entire birth. All the midwives were
great, but the first set definitely had more information
about me and what was normal for me than the second
group.

Best wishes,
Ericka