Mothering Forum banner

used to feel homebirth was best... but not anymore

17K views 245 replies 88 participants last post by  UnassistedMomma 
#1 ·
i realize what i'm about to say is against the mdc prevailing thought .. and i have great respect for mdc and learned more here than anywhere else, been supported more here than anywhere else. i've wanted to post for months but always chickened out because i'm sure someone will get angry and i don't feel strong enough right now after what happened. but i think it's important that i say this. it might save a life.

all my life - well since 14 when i saw my first h/b - i've thought h/b is the way to go, avoiding all the bad things that can happen in hospitals, the cascade of interventions, the fights over 'it's our policy do do this and that' and so on.

so when i was pregnant i devoured ina may's books, michael odent, websites on homebirth, practised hypnobirthing, planned to use water and tubs in labor, read everything about relaxation, normal course of labor, complications, scientific studies on safety and so on (i'm married to a doc,) found a midwife i thought i gelled with - a very experienced woman for sure. paid out of pocket for her services as my insurance wouldn't cover it. i felt with every inch of my body that i did not want interventions and that i wanted to be left alone to find my own rhythm of birth, without being told 'you must do this or that, it's been X hours, yadayada' i also strongly strongly felt i did not want any drugs in my baby and as you know, labor drugs pass the placenta and we don't know the long term effects of this.

so this is what happened and why i don't feel having a baby outside a hospital is worth the risk if you want to have the best chance to go home alive and with a healthy baby..BUT hear me out and read why and what i think the solution is.. until we have a third choice.

i had a completely normal pregnancy. labor started with one intense excruciating contraction that went on and on, then stopped for a few minutes then started again. i was in terrible pain, couldn't speak, tried to crawl to the shower, hypnotherapy didn't work, nothing did. i was 1cm dil. i said i had to go to the hospital as i felt something was wrong. the m/w said i was acting as though i had the pain of transition. but i was 1cm.

we went to the hospital, a 15 min car ride, and to cut a long story short i had an epidural shortly after as morphine didn't work. pain was off the charts. yes i know older studies suggested early epidurals increase the chance of c section. newer studies have refuted this.

the rest of labor was uneventful, apart from me feeling a bit of a failure. after 24 hours of so of labor, eventually had pitocin because stalled at 4, a well placed epidural that allowed me to walk around so i could try to make him descend. no progression. eventually talk of c section as the baby's heart was slowing periodically (yes a known cause of pit augmentation but that could not have caused what happened next.. so don't jump at me :)

c section, baby was apgar 9/9 and in excellent health and weight

as soon as he was out i started hemorrhaging. badly. within seconds. the docs were not tugging on the placenta, (i.e. they didn't cause it.. my husband was watching) but the blood was gushing out from around where the placenta was and the plac was partly stuck too deeply and partly coming off in chunks as they watched. i lost 4 (i think) liters of blood (some of the stuff they put in me came right out) had many units of tranfused blood and other assorted stuff, by a miracle they saved the uterus (ask me how if you're interested), i passed out from lack of blood (bp was something like 50/30 at one point) for a few secs. this bleeding happened in the space of 5 minutes immediately after birth, all from where the placenta was attached.

i was taken to the ICU and didn't see my son till day 2 - though i'm happy to report that breastfeeding was great when i started and it continued till he was a year. no probs with that at all. i had further transfusions and was sent home after a week. my diagnosis was formally 'placenta accreta', meaning the placenta was embedded too deeply into the uterus. (necessarily a clinical diagnosis i.e. from what they saw and what happened, as i still had my uterus so they could not slice that up to look at the structure of it. however the placental side strongly suggested accreta because of cellular abnormalities and other things (ask if interested)

most women lose their uterus with this, about 10-20% die (check the stats, i'm doing this from memory). you can lose most of the blood in your body in 5-10 minutes. so it was a blessing that i was in an OR when this happened and that i had insisted on going to the hospital. i can't claim great foresight.. i just felt that labors do not start with excruciating pain at 1cm dilation.

i was VERY lucky. i am very lucky to be alive. i can say with all honesty that if he had been born at home i would likely be dead because of how quickly i lost so much blood. accreta is happening more and more as women have more c sections and thus have more scar tissue where the placenta can dig in too deep, but i'd never had a c section.

my point is this.. there are some obstetric emergencies that can kill you wherever you are but you stand a much better chance in the hospital. one of these is accreta, another is amniotic fluid embolism (the biggest killer of women in birth. i had a mild form of this too), another is a ruptured uterus (yes you have warning sometimes that this is happening, but sometimes it's sudden and the baby would die before you were able to get to the hospital.) and that's not to mention sudden problems with the baby that can happen.

these things are RARE, very rare, incredibly rare (i think accreta is something like 1/60,000 births) BUT if you are in a hospital you have a greater chance of living and to my mind it's just not worth the risk to stay home.

in the complications i listed above there's sadly nothing you can do at a homebirth - manually compressing the uterus to stop bleeding would not have stopped it in my case (the docs had the whole uterus in their hands and squeezing like crazy.. nothing..), in the case of amniotic fluid embolism you need massive interventions, will prob go into cardiac arrest in seconds and even in a hospital some 60-70% of women die. it happens randomly, no way of knowing if it'll be you.

now, having said that.. i think what is lacking in most cities is a 'third way', a place run by midwives (san francisco had st lukes'..futon on floor, candles, tubs etc) in a hospital but allowing a homebirth birth with all the best that a midwife can provide, the emotional support, handholding, experience with normal births and so on, BUT with emergency life support measures in the building if needed in those rare rare cases. (but it could be you remember)

so where does that leave most women who don't want to sign up for a medicalized birth in a hospital yet have nowhere else to do this but home.

i think for now.. until there are more 'homebirth in hospital' type places, the safest choice is hospital BUT i believe it's also the responsibility of every woman to prepare herself by reading and studying and asking questions about all the things a hospital will want to do and how you can refuse those you don't think are necessary, and by having a doula or support person who can be firm about what you want and don't want, thus allowing you to focus on birthing as naturally as you can.

we don't need to choose the hospital and just throw up our hands and be helpless and feel that the process is out of our hands. it isn't - WE are still in control and making decisions, or at least we should be.

i think we should spend more time learning and thinking about birth than choosing a car.. yet it seems the opposite at times.

i think if hospitals weren't so pushy with routine things, if they provided more choice in the things that can make a difference between a relaxed, happy mom managing her own birth and a woman who is 'delivered of a baby' as the victorians used to say, then we wouldn't see the high c section rates and all the birth interventions that are often neither necessary nor helpful. (i suspect liability fears are at the base of many interventions.. you'll get sued for not doing something but not for doing it) but there's no reason we have to have any of these things done to us.

there's no real reason why midwives shouldn't work in hospitals as they would in a woman's home, why hospitals shouldn't have all the things that make for a good safe birth. i believe that birth is a natural, normal event and that is should be supported by people who know the natural event best - midwives - but that the safety net should be there, just as you probably would choose to use safety measures in any other activity in life, if they were available.

well i'm an idealist and i also know that birth is a business.. it costs more to have more nurses looking after a women 1:1 rather than one nurse at the nurses' station monitoring contractions of 15 women via electronic fetal monitoring. sure - and that's probably why my ideal solution isn't happening in many places. BUT we can get as close as possible by bringing in our own doula and/or midwife who does give us 1:1 care and knows what to look out for and knows the type of encouragement we need. we can do this. we can also visit hospitals in advance and know the layout, ask questions, decide if hosp A or B is best, lobby for this 'third choice' when talking with our Obs or with the hospital authorities themselves. it's a business remember, so they would hopefully respond to market demand :)

we can say no to routine interventions we believe are unnecessary, but we have to be informed, know what we are saying no to and realize that life is fragile and it is, in my opinion, not worth risking the life of one mother when such a risk is not necessary.

a mom.
 
See less See more
#102 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ladybyrd View Post
I understand that your birth was traumatic; I've had a traumatic birth experience, myself. However, just because you feel that the only safety net is to be in a hospital doesn't make it so, and the statistics bear that out.

But again, just because you've changed your mind on the safety of homebirths doesn't mean that the actual safety of homebirths has changed. The only thing that has changed is your perspective. You're basing your opinion on some pretty powerful emotions, rather than basing them in facts.

If I have an emergency that my midwife can't handle, I'll be off to the hospital, no questions asked. That is what the hospital is there for.

Unfortunately, though, and this isn't meant as an attack, you aren't informing. It really amounts to scaremongering, because while you think you're providing information, your 'information' isn't based in fact - it's based completely off of fear.

I hope this doesn't offend you, but I cannot bear in mind what you're saying as I go through my life and/or my pregnancy, because the facts don't bear out what you're saying. You can disagree with the statistics and you can disagree with the studies that show the safety of homebirth, but when you do so, it's tantamount to sticking your head in the sand. I will base my childbearing decisions in fact, rather than out of fear of the "what if."

I truly hope you are able to find peace with your birth.
ITA. This is a great post.
 
#103 ·
I think applejuice is 100% right here.

Also I want to add that I wasn't even allowed to *photograph* my sister's birth of her last baby, despite the fact that she really really wanted me to and she knew it would be the last one ever ~ the nurse physically removed the camera and told me if I insisted on keeping it out / on I would have to leave the hospital.
So ... yeah.

I think there is really a perception being put out there that hospitals will go along with the mother's wishes if only she'd express them ~~ but that's just not the case. I had an extremely traumatic birth experience with my 1st baby, in a hospital, because of their "protocol" and their "regulations" and sheer bullying... I mean, when you're a mother in extreme pain and you're the only one there, or your birth partner / support person is there but won't stand up for you, and five nurses and a dr are ALL telling you that you don't have a right to birth how you want, to refuse whatever it is they're telling you that you "need" ... it's darn near impossible to really make your wishes known and adhered to.
 
#104 ·
I couldn't read all of this because I'm pregnant and trying to avoid reading really negative birth stories.

While there are cases in which being in the hospital can save a life there are statistically more times in which being in the hospital creates the life threatening emergency.

I'll stick with homebirth.
 
#105 ·
Quote:
IMO, antibiotics have saved more lives in this area than anything else.
You are absolutely correct.

If one were to narrow down the things that have saved women in childbirth, it would be antibiotics and blood transfusions.

None of the monitoring, pain meds, labor inducing drugs, regional anesthetics, intravenous fluids, episiotomies, caesarean sections, confinement, forceps, vacuums, shaving, or enemas have helped more than simple cleanliness and fluid replacement to save women in labor. Handwashing helps also! Thank you, Dr. Semmelweis! He suggested that doctors do what midwives had done for centuries and his colleagues put him in an asylm where he died.

None of this improved mortality and morbidity has anything to do with being in a hospital.
 
#106 ·
This post seemed as if it was the attempting to process her traumatic birth, as she has every right to. however, the more you (OP) post, the more I am beginning to believe you are actually trying to convince other mothers that your view of hospital birth is not seriously flawed, which it is. I am glad you and your baby are doing ok..although im sorry you seem to be having PPD and are struggling w/ your birth...but please, unless you can address the issues that are being brought up here (which I don't see you doing), stop trying to convince others that we should be running to the hospital.

women are NOT allowed to control the hospital environment. women are not given many options...often birth plans are thrown out the window and disregarded for all kinds of nonsensical reasons.
 
#107 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
No, there isn't "a reason". There are lots of reasons. Yes - OBs have saved lives. They've also cost lives. IMO, antibiotics have saved more lives in this area than anything else.

I've also looked at old records from...England, I think, and women started dying like flies when they started going to hospitals, instead of having their babies at home. Some wards lost 100%. That part always gets glossed over by the "OMG - women used to die in childbirth all the time" crowd.
really? I would love to see that information. I'm serious. I know that hospitals back in the day were extremely dirty. I'm not talking about hospitals 200 years ago because as of 1880 or so, childbirth was still the number one cause of death for women. Once they got the germ thing figured out, mortality rates plummeted. And like I said, modern medicine is NOT perfect. I certainly don't believe that. My husband (an MD, mind you) wanted a home birth before we found out we were having a breech baby who wouldn't turn and NO ONE would deliver him except my husband who was NOT comfortable with that role, so we had a section.
 
#108 ·
i'm afraid the facts do NOT say that homebirth is safer because (as i explained in an earlier post) such a study is impossible to do.

you would have to take a group of low risk pregnant women and randomly assign them to home with the same set up (same midwives, same everything or hospital (same hospital, same obs and nurses) . and that's a study noone can do.

i'm not going to get into the absolute accuracy of studies for the above reason and because these are not 'facts'. noone CAN prove that home or hospital is safer in the vast majority of cases, but i'm not talking about the vast majority of cases. i'm talking about sudden emergencies that can ONLY be taken care of in a hospital, emergencies which are NOT predictable and which can be fatal if not caught in time. and which might be fatal anyway.

you say i don't look at the facts - well there are no facts when it comes to birth, except that a baby will be born one way or the other.

the other fairly certain thing is that if you have something catastrophic happen to you and you bleed out, or your heart stops or your uterus ruptures with little warning, you will most likely have a bad outcome if you are at home.

i'm not talking about the relative safety, but about those deaths that could be preventable, if a women had been close to backup.

saying 'if i feel something is wrong i'll go to a hospital' sounds nice but you do NOT always have time sadly. you can be dead before you get there. saying 'i'll feel if something is wrong' also sounds nice. and i did feel something was wrong. and i do not KNOW if that was connected to accreta. it could just be a total coincidence that i had a painful labor. i have a hunch, yes, but hunches are not facts. women who suddenly collapse AFE have no warning. (of the few survivor stories (many survive but brain dead) some report a metallic taste in their mouth for a few *seconds* before they collapse.

wouldn't the possibility of something like that happening to you, with all the sadness that implies, make you feel more comfortable in the only place that can handle such an event? even if you have to fight with a nurse or get cut when you don't want to be.

those of us in earthquake zones often buy quake insurance, even though it's such a rare event. we don't rely on 'it isn't going to happen to me' because we just don't know.

please don't quote 'safety of homebirth' statistics at me. i've read all the studies and neither they nor the hospital is safer studies are relevant in this case nor as i said a the beginning of this post can they demonstrate that homebirth is safer. there are just too many confounders. i'm talking about sudden obstetric emergencies that kill you if you're out of a hospital.

at the end of the day we each decide for ourselves. i felt talking about my experience was useful and relevant.

and to be told 'homebirth is safer this study says so' is patronizing at best and irrelevant at least. i did read those studies you know. i did quote them at my husband (the skeptical doc) who actually designs healthcare studies himself and pointed out a million flaws in them (and the hospital-is-safer studies too.

when something bad happens, and you don't know if it's going to happen to you, wouldn't you rather have that (imperfect) but potentially lifesaving safety net?
 
#110 ·
Quote:
you would have to take a group of low risk pregnant women and randomly assign them to home with the same set up (same midwives, same everything or hospital (same hospital, same obs and nurses) . and that's a study noone can do.
That study was done in Northern California by Dr. Lewis Mehl, M.D. and published in 1978. It showed lower morbidity for the home birth group simply because fewer interventions were available to them. The home birth group did better in every way. It was a very well done, scientifically contrived study.
 
#111 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by pannacotta View Post
wouldn't the possibility of something like that happening to you, with all the sadness that implies, make you feel more comfortable in the only place that can handle such an event? even if you have to fight with a nurse or get cut when you don't want to be.

1. You have mentioned death many many many times in this thread. When I was experiencing ppd with dd1, I thought about death CONSTANTLY. I was constantly terrified that I'd die, she'd die, my dh would die, my other kids would die. It was a huge red flag that I was experiencing ppd.

2. Honestly, NOTHING IS SAFE. By your standards, we should all be in a hospital RIGHT NOW, with IVs already started, because we could walk outside our front door and get hit by a car. By your standards, nobody should live in a small town, because their hospitals are less likely to be able to handle SERIOUS emergencies, and we should all live close to hospitals that are equipped to handle severe emergencies.

I've had a pph and needed a hospital transfer, and I still don't think it's the place to give birth. I could have DIED. I was bleeding profusely. Things were starting to get a little fuzzy. But it doesn't make homebirth safe, or hospital birth safer than homebirth.
 
#112 ·
Pannacotta, I am amazed by your strength and courage, both in what you went through and in having this conversation, but I cannot agree with many of your statements, or with your conclusions.

In particular, NO, it is not possible to go to a hospital and labor while they leave you alone.

There is no hospital I know of that will admit you on your mere word that you are in labor. They want to prove it to themselves. They want to attach you to monitors ("Here honey, lie down..."), and check your cervix, and wait, and check your cervix again. They want fifteen minutes of monitor tape showing contractions. They will not admit you without this. If you need a place to labor, you are at their mercy. (Bonus: I got a dithering resident who didn't want to admit me until the attending for the floor could see me. And the attending was busy delivering someone else's baby. I had to argue with her just to be able to *walk the L&D ward* instead of lying in the triage area.) They want to check the baby's heart rate. And your blood pressure. They want to separate you from your partner for just a minute! to ask if there's abuse in your relationship (which, for the record, I totally support them doing, but gosh is it an added stress to notice that they're shuffling your partner off to where? for why? when you feel like you need that person).

And then they want to parade an anesthesiologist by you to get signed consent forms in case you want an epidural later. (I got an idiot anesthesiologist who wanted me to sit down while he gave a lecture on the risks of epidural. It took that man twenty minutes to give that talk, talking for three minutes, waiting through a one minute contraction, and talking until the next one hit, but it was "hospital policy" that they do this.)

Funny, after four hours of labor in less than ideal circumstances, I *did* want the epidural. Which meant, much later, that I got to be the textbook example of why epidurals suck, and but for the rockstar attending obstetrician, I would have had a c-section, I'm sure. It took me five hours to push my son into the world, and for three of those, there was a doctor standing around telling me that if he wasn't out in 30 more minutes, we would have to reconsider surgery.

I didn't just blandly consent to everything - from flat on my back with an epi in my spine, I sent the doc who suggested pitocin scurrying in fear. I put the screws into the admitting resident until she got me a goldang room. I painstakingly re-explained our birth plan to the people who'd never gotten the paperwork, and reminded the doctors and nurses of relevant details while I labored, while I pushed, while I bled all over the delivery room (I had a hemorrhage I believe I never would have had at home).

I shouldn't have had to do any of it. It was a diversion of my energy and attention at a time when I had none of those things to spare. If ever I have another baby, I will do what it takes to stay out of the hospital. Hospitals aren't "just a safety net", and they probably never will be.
 
#113 ·
sure i have had problems coming to terms with the birth but that has nothing to do with how i'm addressing the issue now. i'm seeing things more clearly having been on both side of the table as it were.

i'm addressing ALL the questions thrown at me as far as time permits. send me a list of questions i'm not addressing and i'll try to answer them.

but i'm also meeting a wall of silence, of 'we don't want to consider anything different from what we believe' which i frankly didn't expect from MC.

i'm hearing the same statistics again and again (and they are worthless as i've pointed out since you can't design the definitive study unless you're in a totalitarian state!),

i'm hearing that 'if i bleed i'll go to the hospital' , (what if no time)

it's pretty odd to say that because i had a difficult birth (handled very well by the hospital surprisingly) i can't be coherently debating this.

at the end of the day if you want to HB then we are lucky to have the freedom to chose it, but my OP was to point out that please be *aware* by reading about a personal experience that there are some things you have a much greater chance of surviving in a hospital.

things that are not talked about much, things that are rare, but things that can change a family forever if they don't work out.

if you chose HB with a fully open brain, knowing why you chose this, knowing all the issues on the table, then it's a conscious choice.

but choosing HB because of 'studies that "show" HB is safer" or 'my midwife said we can transfer' or 'i feel it's the best for me' (those who were wrong on this aren't here to tell the tale) is another matter.

just think about what i'm saying, that's all i ask.

i'm going to stop now, this is getting upsetting as it's veered into attacks.
 
#114 ·
I just have to say that based on your conclusion, we should all find utopia. Why do people live in California if they know that an earthquake is bound to happen? Why do people rebuild homes many times over after repeated natural disasters? Life is full of choices and possibilities, some of them include death. I personally think that once a person has come to terms with the idea that death is going to happen and we don't know when, they will make good informed decisions in their lives.
 
#115 ·
I just want to say, pannacotta, thank you for posting your story. I think it is important to hear all angles. And it was courageous of you to post your view, knowing all the while that it would probably be disputed or even attacked here on MDC.

I love MDC, but sometimes I feel that people here are very eager to jump the gun on telling someone that their perception isn't right, if it doesn't go with the traditional MDC views.

I think that we should remember that the views that many MDCers have today (non-circ, non-vax, homebirth, etc.) were once considered extremist views. Moms who have these views I am sure resent people telling them that their choice is irresponsible, and jumping all over their backs. Just because on MDC these views seem to be more the norm, doesn't mean we should bash or poke at people who think differently.

My husband and I are TTC, and the way people on here talk about it, hospitals are the devil. It makes me feel like if I don't choose homebirth in the future I am a wuss, or am not doing what's best. I think every mom deserves to feel good about her birthing choice.

I am not sure of the message of my post, I am just hoping this post doesn't get ugly. I have seen others like it get shut down for this very reason. Peace, everyone, peace!!
 
#117 ·
"but in balance i think the bad things that happen in hospitals are fewer and less likely to be fatal than the things a hospital can save you from. BUT ONLY if you are very well prepared with knowledge, support."

Well, I'm sorry you think that - you certainly have every reason to. I think that the maternal mortality risks are the same, the infant mortality risks are probably the same (with homebirth likely edging out hospital birth as safer, with singleton vertex births, but you're right, the stats aren't conclusive on that one), and the morbidity risks for mother and child are simply not comparable. Hospital are risky places to birth. I also think you are incredibly naive about what it takes to avoid the very real risks of being in the hospital. It really isn't a matter of being prepared enough, of having enough support. You can adjust the odds, but they'll still be against you.

And as you say below, you can't prove that your "in balance I think" is actually correct. I will take the risk of dying via something a hospital could have prevented and the much, much better likelihood that my baby will be safe and healthy over the risk that I will die via something a hospital caused and the much higher likelihood that I will experience trauma, pain, violation, and my baby will be traumatized, hurt, and/or damaged, and my future babies having a higher likelihood of death.

You haven't yet said anything that is new or would make me reconsider my support of homebirth, although you have very eloquently stated why women would very much feel it necessary to birth in the hospital, and I thank you for that window into fear.


Quote:

Originally Posted by pannacotta View Post
i'm afraid the facts do NOT say that homebirth is safer because (as i explained in an earlier post) such a study is impossible to do.

you would have to take a group of low risk pregnant women and randomly assign them to home with the same set up (same midwives, same everything or hospital (same hospital, same obs and nurses) . and that's a study noone can do.

i'm not going to get into the absolute accuracy of studies for the above reason and because these are not 'facts'. noone CAN prove that home or hospital is safer in the vast majority of cases, but i'm not talking about the vast majority of cases. i'm talking about sudden emergencies that can ONLY be taken care of in a hospital, emergencies which are NOT predictable and which can be fatal if not caught in time. and which might be fatal anyway.

you say i don't look at the facts - well there are no facts when it comes to birth, except that a baby will be born one way or the other.

the other fairly certain thing is that if you have something catastrophic happen to you and you bleed out, or your heart stops or your uterus ruptures with little warning, you will most likely have a bad outcome if you are at home.

i'm not talking about the relative safety, but about those deaths that could be preventable, if a women had been close to backup.

saying 'if i feel something is wrong i'll go to a hospital' sounds nice but you do NOT always have time sadly. you can be dead before you get there. saying 'i'll feel if something is wrong' also sounds nice. and i did feel something was wrong. and i do not KNOW if that was connected to accreta. it could just be a total coincidence that i had a painful labor. i have a hunch, yes, but hunches are not facts. women who suddenly collapse AFE have no warning. (of the few survivor stories (many survive but brain dead) some report a metallic taste in their mouth for a few *seconds* before they collapse.

wouldn't the possibility of something like that happening to you, with all the sadness that implies, make you feel more comfortable in the only place that can handle such an event? even if you have to fight with a nurse or get cut when you don't want to be.

those of us in earthquake zones often buy quake insurance, even though it's such a rare event. we don't rely on 'it isn't going to happen to me' because we just don't know.

please don't quote 'safety of homebirth' statistics at me. i've read all the studies and neither they nor the hospital is safer studies are relevant in this case nor as i said a the beginning of this post can they demonstrate that homebirth is safer. there are just too many confounders. i'm talking about sudden obstetric emergencies that kill you if you're out of a hospital.

at the end of the day we each decide for ourselves. i felt talking about my experience was useful and relevant.

and to be told 'homebirth is safer this study says so' is patronizing at best and irrelevant at least. i did read those studies you know. i did quote them at my husband (the skeptical doc) who actually designs healthcare studies himself and pointed out a million flaws in them (and the hospital-is-safer studies too.

when something bad happens, and you don't know if it's going to happen to you, wouldn't you rather have that (imperfect) but potentially lifesaving safety net?
That safety net is an illusion, as many of us have stated. It's just as likely to kill you as it is to save you. It saved you. You are grateful. I am grateful, for whatever that's worth. Isn't that enough?
 
#118 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by pannacotta View Post

just think about what i'm saying, that's all i ask.

I don't know a single homebirther who HASN'T heard, "I would have died if not for the hospital." This is not the first time, nor will it be the last, of a mom transferring for a potentially life-threatening complication and espousing the virtues of the hospital.

Women who choose homebirth do not make that choice in a vacuum (or on an island, whatever the analogy is).
 
#120 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by pannacotta View Post

i'm hearing that 'if i bleed i'll go to the hospital' , (what if no time)

i'm going to stop now, this is getting upsetting as it's veered into attacks.
Like I mentioned, I had a bad pph with my first that was not responsive to drugs and required a D&C, so I did a lot of research into causes, prevention, etc of pph. So it is so unbelievably small of a risk to bleed out with no time and no symptoms and no known causes that I could not find a single instance of this happening in a developed country in recent memory. Most causes of pph can be seen coming (mine was uterine atony after a long labour) and most midwives I know will not hesitate to transfer at excessive bleeding. Your scare tactics are not backed up by research and are obfuscating your argument.

No one has attacked you. Disagreement does not equal attacks.
 
#121 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by ThreeBeans View Post
Having been through severe PPD myself, I know just how illogical it can make a person.
Now now, would you be suggesting that she is illogical due to PPD if she were a homebirth supporter instead? ................just saying.........be nice people!
:
 
#122 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by pannacotta View Post
but my OP was to point out that please be *aware* by reading about a personal experience that there are some things you have a much greater chance of surviving in a hospital. ...

if you chose HB with a fully open brain, knowing why you chose this, knowing all the issues on the table, then it's a conscious choice.

choosing HB because of 'studies that "show" HB is safer" ... is another matter.
I think the problem is that you see those two things as contradictory. They're not. Homebirth can be as safe/safer than hospital birth overall AND there can be some things that you have a greater chance of surviving in a hospital. Yes, there are things that can happen without warning and result in death at home, where if you were in a hospital there would be at least a chance at life. When you planned your homebirth, was that not something you thought about?

My understanding of how hospitals work, and the available evidence and studies, leads me to believe that in the real world of real hospitals, the chance of a catastrophic event resulting in a homebirth death is not any higher than the chance of dying during childbirth in a hospital.

I can understand your perspective. If something happens to you, statistics don't mean anything. You were safer in the hospital. If you were still at home, you believe there's 100% chance that you would have died. But that doesn't mean that somehow hospital birth is always safer than homebirth, or that if all homebirthers choose to birth in the hospital instead that there would be fewer deaths. You can't generalize from one person's extremely rare experience, or we could all start making plans based on winning the lottery.
 
#123 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by pannacotta View Post
i'm writing this - and it's been very difficult to write it, i'm still suffering from the effects of this birth and i hate to say what i feel i should say about homebirth but having been so close to death i am not the person i was and so aware of how such an event can happen to anyone. i suppose i'm trying to say look beyond the statistics of 'what is safe in 99% of cases' and think would you be comfortable with the consequences on you or your family if that 1% chance happens to you.
Here's the problem with this kind of thinking: yes, there is a 1% chance that something will happen that will be horribly dangerous at home. I could choose to go to a hospital, but then I will up my chance exponentially that something horrible will happen. I've had two hospital births - they were pretty uneventful comparatively. However, I have seen how quickly something minor can be blown out of proportion at a hospital. I've had to live with those consequences, and the guilt is horrible. I'd rather take my 99% that everything will turn out great at home.

I'm sure someone else has said something similar, but I don't have time to read everything! And no, I think you should be able to express your opinion even if others disagree with it. I'm sorry you had such a scary experience, and I'm glad you came through it okay. I'm very glad you listened to your intuition.
 
#125 ·
Oh also since someone, probably pannacotta, asked for sources ~ I highly recommend going to a library (preferably a University library) and browsing their section on childbirth in the 1800's through 1960's. Look for Michel Odent, look for Dr. Grantley Dick-Read. Look for Ina May Gaskin (also featured in this month's Mothering
). Look for Jeannine Parvati-Baker. Look for books about women's conditions of home and family / childbirth in the 1850's through 1950's. Read until your eyes are bloodshot.

There is so much evidence out there that hospital birth is just not as safe as delivering at home and on your own terms, at present and historically, and the reasons behind this.
 
#126 ·
I don't know. Scare tactic is neutral. It is not an attack. I think disregarding the safety of home births because of the off chance that something can happen when being at the hospital can be just as likely to cause a problem is a scare tactic.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top