This is why it's hard to find a homebirth midwife

"Phoebe & Allyson" wrote in message
...
Apparently, a woman was planning a homebirth with a CPM.
She went into labor, the midwife came by a couple times to
check her out, 12 hours later she was at 2cm. Another
client went into labor, and the midwife went to check on the
second woman. Woman one decided that there was no way she
could have been in labor that long and only gotten to 2cm,
the midwife must have been lying to her, and she'd now been
abandoned to have her baby unattended. So she went to the
hospital and had her baby there. The midwife refunded all
of her money, and the woman is still mad about how poorly
she was treated.

I guess that's one risk of having one midwife there for your labor. There's
always the chance she'd have to be a more than one place at once. Maybe
that's why I'd rather be in a hospital. If my doc isn't there, someone else
will be.

Phoebe & Allyson wrote in message ...

Having had a long, slow-to-start labor ending in successful
homebirth, I've got a lot more sympathy for the midwife than
for the laboring woman. Yeah, it sucks to have been in
labor for that long with no sign of impending baby, but
having the midwife sit there and stare at you for 24 hours
isn't going to make it go any faster.

I don't know about the specific situation, but isn't one
advantage of a midwife is that she/he is supposed to be
skilled in helping the laboring woman cope with the
discomfort without medication?

I had a long labor myself, and after 24 hours I was pretty,
er, cranky. :-) If I'd gone into it with an expectation that
a midwife would be there helping, and all she did was drop
in to check my cervix, I could see being upset.

Beth
Sam 8/16/2002

"Phoebe & Allyson" wrote in message
...
At least in my area. I heard this story secondhand from my
mom, who heard it from the local TV news, so all bets are
off as to reliability.

Midwifery (other than CNMs) is alegal in Oklahoma. I'm not
aware of any CNMs who do homebirths, both because there's no
malpractice carrier who will cover it, and because there are
no OBs willing to be backups. There are a handful of CPMs
and a larger handful of uncredentialled homebirth midwives,
though.

Apparently, a woman was planning a homebirth with a CPM.
She went into labor, the midwife came by a couple times to
check her out, 12 hours later she was at 2cm. Another
client went into labor, and the midwife went to check on the
second woman. Woman one decided that there was no way she
could have been in labor that long and only gotten to 2cm,
the midwife must have been lying to her, and she'd now been
abandoned to have her baby unattended. So she went to the
hospital and had her baby there. The midwife refunded all
of her money, and the woman is still mad about how poorly
she was treated.

Having had a long, slow-to-start labor ending in successful
homebirth, I've got a lot more sympathy for the midwife than
for the laboring woman. Yeah, it sucks to have been in
labor for that long with no sign of impending baby, but
having the midwife sit there and stare at you for 24 hours
isn't going to make it go any faster.

Phoebe


It would make me feel very uncomfortable too! Even with a hospital birth
most people I know stay at home until the contractions hot up. I spent about
half my labor at home, I was 6-7com when I got to hospital and lots of
people I know are the same.

My SIL who had two attempted homebirths didn't call the midwife until later
int he labor. What's that saying "a watched pot never boils"?

Must go toddler with camera arrgghh

Judy

"Phoebe & Allyson" wrote in message
...
At least in my area. I heard this story secondhand from my
mom, who heard it from the local TV news, so all bets are
off as to reliability.

Midwifery (other than CNMs) is alegal in Oklahoma. I'm not
aware of any CNMs who do homebirths, both because there's no
malpractice carrier who will cover it, and because there are
no OBs willing to be backups. There are a handful of CPMs
and a larger handful of uncredentialled homebirth midwives,
though.

Apparently, a woman was planning a homebirth with a CPM.
She went into labor, the midwife came by a couple times to
check her out, 12 hours later she was at 2cm. Another
client went into labor, and the midwife went to check on the
second woman. Woman one decided that there was no way she
could have been in labor that long and only gotten to 2cm,
the midwife must have been lying to her, and she'd now been
abandoned to have her baby unattended. So she went to the
hospital and had her baby there. The midwife refunded all
of her money, and the woman is still mad about how poorly
she was treated.

Having had a long, slow-to-start labor ending in successful
homebirth, I've got a lot more sympathy for the midwife than
for the laboring woman. Yeah, it sucks to have been in
labor for that long with no sign of impending baby, but
having the midwife sit there and stare at you for 24 hours
isn't going to make it go any faster.

Who knows what really happened, but it's a little sketchy that woman one ran
to the news station with her "story".
--
JennP.
mom to matthew 10/11/00
EDD 4/4/04

toypup wrote:


I guess that's one risk of having one midwife there for your labor. There's
always the chance she'd have to be a more than one place at once. Maybe
that's why I'd rather be in a hospital. If my doc isn't there, someone else
will be.


That's why most midwives work in pairs (or at least
with a trained birth assistant of some sort) and also have
backups.

Best wishes,
Ericka

"toypup" wrote
I guess that's one risk of having one midwife there for your labor. There's
always the chance she'd have to be a more than one place at once. Maybe
that's why I'd rather be in a hospital. If my doc isn't there, someone else
will be.

Mary responds:
Nah, that is what happens when you have no licensing and regulation of
midwives. Here in Ontario, they ALWAYS have group practices and
backups, so if your main midwife is elsewhere, you are covered.

Mary G.

Ilse Witch wrote in message ...
Phoebe & Allyson wrote:

Having had a long, slow-to-start labor ending in successful homebirth,
I've got a lot more sympathy for the midwife than for the laboring
woman. Yeah, it sucks to have been in labor for that long with no sign
of impending baby, but having the midwife sit there and stare at you for
24 hours isn't going to make it go any faster.

In the Netherlands, where homebirth is more common, a midwife will
never stay when a woman is only 2cm dilated. They will set a time
upon which they return for another check, and will leave. They
often have several home births to attend, so there is no way a
midwife could stay with one woman all night.

snip

I can't believe how impatient people are. It takes however long it
takes. I was in labor for 27 hours, unmedicated, attended by a midwife
in a freestanding birthing center. It's a baby, for pete's sake, not
microwave popcorn. My midwife had to leave and come back too, it
wasn't the end of the world. It was just more of the same while she
was gone, contraction, breathe, me: "I can't do this" dh: "yes you
can" contraction, breathe etc. She didn't miss much. She was there for
the important part, LOL.

-V.

"Ilse Witch" wrote in message
...
toypup wrote:

I guess that's one risk of having one midwife there for your labor.
There's
always the chance she'd have to be a more than one place at once. Maybe
that's why I'd rather be in a hospital. If my doc isn't there, someone
else
will be.

IME: docs are usually not there when labour starts, and hardly ever
around if you need them. Besides that, having a total stranger coming
in, shake your hand, and go right down to business is also not a very
nice thing when you're pushing...

IME, there's a doc available always and a backup doc besides and lots of
midwives. There's always someone available in the hospital I'm at. They
may not be in the room at all times, but the second you need one, they're
there. I'm comfortable with strangers there when I'm pushing but I think
that won't be a problem anyway. I've met most of the docs from last
delivery, since I was admitted so much for preterm labor. They take 24 hour
shifts, so I'd meet a new doc everyday until I finally met most all of them.
If any of them delivered my baby or was there when I needed help, I'd have
been fine.

"Elfanie" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:59:27 GMT, "toypup" wrote:


Maybe
that's why I'd rather be in a hospital. If my doc isn't there, someone
else
will be.


There has GOT to be more important/bigger reasons why you'd rather be
in a hospital, though...
becuase unless you live someplace with only one midwife and she is
very busy...your midwife would be there or a backup midwife would be
there if you were having a homebirth. (and at 2cm in a hospital, your
doctor absolutely will NOT wait around in the room for you...not even
at the hospital. Your doctor would leave and come back, too....IF
they even admit you. Many hospitals woudl send you home at 2cm...)

I didn't say I'd go in at 2 cm. Don't put words in my mouth. There's a
doctor or midwife at the hospital ready, if I need one. I don't need them
standing outside my door, I need them nearby, when I'm ready. What if the
midwife and backup midwife were both tied up? One of them is in traffic or
something, the other one at someone else's labor (traffic is a major problem
here)? The docs in the hospital are already there. There is one on duty
and one as backup and many midwives. I feel more secure that I could get
someone's attention quickly, if I had an urgent problem. Sure, they could
all be busy, but they'd be busy with me, if I was the emergency and the
others were not. That's just my reason. I didn't say it had to be anyone
else's reason. If others feel comfortable with two midwives, that's fine
with me. I just don't want it for myself.

toypup wrote:


I didn't say I'd go in at 2 cm. Don't put words in my mouth. There's a
doctor or midwife at the hospital ready, if I need one. I don't need them
standing outside my door, I need them nearby, when I'm ready. What if the
midwife and backup midwife were both tied up? One of them is in traffic or
something, the other one at someone else's labor (traffic is a major problem
here)? The docs in the hospital are already there.


But *you* have to go through the traffic to get
to *them* ;-)

There is one on duty
and one as backup and many midwives. I feel more secure that I could get
someone's attention quickly, if I had an urgent problem. Sure, they could
all be busy, but they'd be busy with me, if I was the emergency and the
others were not. That's just my reason. I didn't say it had to be anyone
else's reason. If others feel comfortable with two midwives, that's fine
with me. I just don't want it for myself.


I can understand your not wanting midwives, but I
really don't think availability is any different between
the two in most cases (excepting things like midwives
practicing solo with no backup, which one obviously
wouldn't choose feeling as you do). In fact, precisely
*because* availability is an issue, midwives have to
be careful to limit their practice to the number of
clients they can handle. The first practice we were
with took on no more than four births a month--and
between their practice and their backups, they could
have handled things if all four went into labor at
once, which would be incredibly unlikely. And these
days, with all the cutbacks, you're more likely to get
to the hospital and find no empty beds! (Happens
not infrequently around here...sometimes the hospital
*and* ER are completely full, with people in the
hallway.)

Best wishes,
Ericka