Have you seen this story?

14 posts / 0 new
Last post
AnnaRO's picture
Joined: 07/06/08
Posts: 7033
Have you seen this story?
kridda_88's picture
Joined: 01/28/08
Posts: 1798

It has already been proven that home birth is just as safe as hospital births. They can't claim that home birth isn't safe just because of one, homebirth advocates, death. The out come probably would have been the same had she been in a hospital as well. Heart attacks come with out warning and even IN a hospital can go unnoticed. I have heard hundreds of story's were a person suffered a heart attack while in the hospital and they passed away from it. Especially a massive one like they claim hers was. Hardly anyone survives a massive heart attack no matter where they are at.

This line just bugs the crap out of me. "although the absolute risk of planned home births is low, published medical evidence shows it does carry a two- to three-fold increase in the risk of newborn death compared with planned hospital births."

That is BS I know a lot more babies who have died in hospital births then in home births and most homebirth babies that die at home would have died in a hospital as well because most of those are genetic disorders were the baby just wont live very long period. Hospitals aren't regulated on how many infant deaths they have so some hospitals don't even record all of them. Just read, Inna May's Guide to Child Birth. She goes over that in her book.

This I can agree with. "If an at-home delivery runs into trouble and there's a hospital five minutes away, that probably is not going to be a big problem," Dr. George A. Macones of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said in a recent interview with NPR. "But if you're half an hour away or 40 minutes away, then that could really ... be a big problem."

Okay, getting off my soap box now.

cactuswren's picture
Joined: 10/19/09
Posts: 4658

Just reading through it quickly, it seemed reasonably fair and they made some good points FOR homebirth in there. They also put in some misleading negative stuff I don't agree with, though. (like what Krista mentioned above)

And I really don't like that they led with that heart attack story. Really lays the groundwork of fear--and honestly, something like that is pretty unforeseeable and rare--and who knows if being in a hospital would actually have saved her anyway! A woman who was in my hypnobirthing class, a low-risk early 30's FTM, had a stroke shortly after giving birth in a hospital and nearly died. She did live but is severely disabled and still going through therapy nearly two years later to regain more movement on one side. She'll probably never regain it all, and had to be separated from her baby for months. Tragic? Absolutely...but a freak story that doesn't really prove anything. Should I now be scared to birth in hospitals because I might have a stroke?

AnnaRO's picture
Joined: 07/06/08
Posts: 7033

I was thinking the same thing. Even though home births are on the rise, there are still less of them than hospital births, so if they are comparing numbers of deaths the numbers would be skewed. There was also a mention of underlying conditions and that the HB advocate had one. Heart conditions could easily go undiagnosed (IMO) and could be an issue no matter where you give birth. I agree that there's a very good chance this person would have died in a hospital setting anyway.

Starryblue702's picture
Joined: 04/06/11
Posts: 5454

They even said in the article that the woman that passed away had a pre-existing underlying medical condition, so I don't think that she was a good candidate for a home birth based on that. She probably could have been saved if she would have been in a hospital setting... and probably would have had a c-section as to not put her body through the rigors of L&D. That being said, I think other than this rare case, it's just as safe for mom and baby if not more to have a homebirth, as that's they way it has been done since the dawn of time. It's just sad that this one rare case has to shed a negative light on the whole thing.

ange84's picture
Joined: 12/28/09
Posts: 6564

:lurk:
She had already given birth to one child and was an advocate for home birth, she was informed of the risks and safety aspects. Who says major surgery would have been safer, the anathesia or follow up pain killers may also have not been safe, we don't know. There is still a lot unknown about this case, including what I have read from more detailed news reports thn this one paragraph. I also didn't see where it said she had a rare underlying condition, but I am exhausted so may have missed it, but in all I have read about it so far they have not known what caused the cardiac arrest.

jolly11sd's picture
Joined: 02/02/05
Posts: 3327

I agree with Leigh that they did put some misleading stuff in there. And totally set the fear factor in the article by opening with the mom who died of a heart attack. The same thing totally could have happened in the hospital with the same outcome.

momW's picture
Joined: 09/29/09
Posts: 5634

Hadn't read that until now. I just say wow to that first part. REALLY? How very tragic and how very unrelated to the topic at hand. I mean there was a guy in town that died of a heart attack last summer while he was out taking a walk. Does that make walking for exercise unsafe? What a joke! (

TyrantOfTheWeek's picture
Joined: 12/26/05
Posts: 1147

Still planning my home birth. Also adding though, there are things in life we have little/no control over. Regardless of where we are.

ourfirstblessing's picture
Joined: 01/07/07
Posts: 1094

a little annoyed that they state that they are 2-3 times more rsiky without citing a reference. the other issue i see is when a baby dies at the hosp. it will likely never get written that it was a result of poor care or numerous unnecessary interventions etc. but if a baby dies after being born at home people freak out and blame the place babe was born.

Lots-o-Tots's picture
Joined: 01/29/06
Posts: 574

Man, you should have seen the FB exchange I got involved in over this article! Women saying things like "why would any woman in her right mind with access to the luxury of a hospital put her or her baby's life at risk by choosing home birth?" and "HOME BIRTH IS DANGEROUS. PERIOD." Oy. And none of them had any facts or references to back up their statements. Very disheartening.

AnnaRO's picture
Joined: 07/06/08
Posts: 7033

"Lots-o-Tots" wrote:

Man, you should have seen the FB exchange I got involved in over this article! Women saying things like "why would any woman in her right mind with access to the luxury of a hospital put her or her baby's life at risk by choosing home birth?" and "HOME BIRTH IS DANGEROUS. PERIOD." Oy. And none of them had any facts or references to back up their statements. Very disheartening.

That's just part of that uneducated mentality that pregnancy is an illness that needs to be treated. Not that medicine and medical intervention doesn't have a place in childbirth, it does, and saves lives. I get that. But for a healthy woman with a healthy pregnancy there is no reason to fear a home birth. IMO. There's a lot that isn't said in that article, and some things that are said that shouldn't have been.

boilermaker's picture
Joined: 08/21/02
Posts: 1984

I hadn't read this until now.

I think what irks me most about the article is that it focuses on the fact that people "might" choose homebirth for the "experience"-- for comfort of the mother, for ease of labor, etc. When the reality is for me (and I believe many other homebirthers)-- is that we believe the birth process to be SAFER for our babies and our bodies at home. I would go through anything to have a healthy, safe baby, and I choose the location where I believe I have the greatest chance at achieving that.

The experience and the comfort are just a bonus-- but my decision comes down to where I think my child stands the best odds, and for me, that is at home.

momW's picture
Joined: 09/29/09
Posts: 5634