midwives...do you think UC is as safe as a homebirth? - Page 3
I think that UC is a valid choice and I support the women who choose it.
If you are comfortable with the smallish odds of something bad happening during your UC, that's fine, and I support womens' rights to choose the way they want to birth. But no, I don't think it's as safe as a birth with a trained professional there. I don't think most women choose to UC because they feel it will be *safer* than having a midwife there; there are many different reasons to UC, I just don't think that's one of them.
ETA: I wanted to add that "UC is acceptably safe" and "UC is *as safe as* MW attended homebirth" are two different things. The first I believe, the second I don't.
What about unassisted, but not unattended? I asked my midwife about this and she said she has been asked a few times to leave the room, go outside, or whatever. That way, you are doing it yourself, but a trained hand is immediately available. Seems like a rational compromise to me.
My opinion is that having a UC won't make something bad happen if it wasn't already going to. In other words, I don't think it can be said to be 'more risky'. The risks for shoulder dystosia, PPH, etc are the same in a UC as they would be otherwise (maybe less if anything, and I'll go into that in a bit). But obviously, if one of these things do happen, the results would be more likely to come out favorably if you had a trained and skilled attendant. So in that sense, yes I think homebirth with a trained midwife is safer than a UC.
On the flip side of that, I recently read a story of a momma here in the UC forums who had a midwife attended birth and IMO ended up with a SD as a direct result of the midwives being in attendance. I can't remember the exact details, but the midwife put her into a position that was not natural to her at the time and was probably less favorable for SD. (This was before the SD even presented itself). There was some panic in the room and some things done that were pretty much a no no all together and could have caused serious damage to mom and baby. I truly believe that in a situation like that, it's entirely possible that the SD wouldn't have happened in the first place (or possibly been resolved a lot quicker) had mom been left to labor and birth the way she intuitively saw fit.
The downfall here is that it's hard to include things like that when weighing out your options because a story like that will be told as "Thank god so and so had a midwife or things would have went horribly wrong." And I think there are certainly stories out there where that statement would be true. But what about the times when interfearance or intervention actually causes the problem in the first place. I think a lot of us in this community would agree that this takes place in hospitals a lot and is one of the reasons for homebirthing in the first place. But this is rarely something that is looked at when dealing with a MW attended homebirth, even though I've heard of it happening multiple times.
I don't think that is a reason for just anyone to UC. I think UC takes a whole lot of knowledge and commitment from both parents. I think it takes a certain sense of calmness, accountability, and responsibility. Things can go wrong in birth no matter where you are and who is with you. It's up to each of us to decide where we feel most comfortable and then be fully prepared to birth in that environment. In the end my decision was to birth at home with a midwife. But I didn't make that decision until 26 weeks and it was largely based on the fact that we got a pretty big tax return and were suddenly able to afford it. Had I not found a midwife I love and feel confidant will respect my space to birth at my own hands, I would probably be telling a different story. I know for us, a hospital birth just wasn't in the picture. I'm thankful to live in a state where we have many many options for midwives both liscensed and not. Now that I've made the decision I'm seeing a bit more clearly everything that goes into a UC and that I just don't want to have to worry about all the aspect of the birth. I'd rather feel free to just labor and know that everything else is being taken care of. I wish you luck with your decision.
I would never make a decision to not birth somewhere because of money. I'm still paying off homebirth midwifery care bills and I transferred for BOTH of my births. My oldest is 3, her birth is still being paid off.
The hospital has to take you. They have to provide services, regardless of financial/insurance status. You will be allowed to set up a payment plan after with them for the birth fees.
UC is a HUGE decision to make and it has to be something you are passionate about and REALLY want. You do not sound as though that is the case. So that wouldn't even be an option if I was in your situation.
Many homebirth midwives will do a sliding scale for fees or let you make payments for their services.
have you applied for medicaid? In most states it has to cover a pregnant woman who has no other insurance. I would call and find out.
Would I UC again, yes. But what I really wanted to write about was not statistics or logistics, but how do you feel about UC? I think that is probably the most important factor in a UC is what is the mothers intuition telling you? Ask yourself and sit with it until you are really certain of your response. But know that it may change over time so continue to check in with yourself.
If you don't feel called to UC, or like you can't do it or are scared of it, I would say find another option. But if you feel called to it, then it might be worth looking in to. What has happened in 1000 births before is really only marginally important to you and your birth. I would recommend seeking your answers inside rather than out.
i absolutely disagree with this statement. after the fact, if everything turns out great, then yes. but if something happened, and baby wasn't ok, then no, i don't think anyone who has been in that situation would say that their emotional health was AS IMPORTANT OR MORESO than their baby's physical health.
that being said,it's your body and your birth and as long as you accept the risk, especially having 2 successful low risk pregnancies and births, you should do what you think feels right.
I am not a midwife- but I have thought about this a LOT lately. Expecting my 7th kiddo in 6 weeks and knowing what my last was like (she is 19 mos) I know that we could easily do it. My husband has seriously joked about it the whole pregnancy, and he is fantastic with this stuff... but still, there is that 'if'. Being a grand multipara, my statistical chances of hemmoraging are higher. One reason I really struggled with my last birth because it felt as if the staff (even though it was a waterbirth and was via nurses and midwives) had that LEAD my birth with unnecisary actions rather than what was actually going on (constant monitoring, making me have an IV, making me get out of the tub after birth asap even without much blood show at all, pressing on my belly hard once the placenta delivered, etc).
I have prepared my girls (almost 11 and almost 12) for an emergency birth- they have seen lots of my own as well as other videos and information, and know what to do if my water breaks. If my water breaks,the baby will most probably be here within 5 minutes- I am NOT going to the hospital. I refuse to birth a baby in the car or on the side of the road or on the floor of the ER. Our plan is that I will get in the tub (which will be prepared to be sanitary since that is what I will be doing in the weeks following) we will call my husband who is 1 mile away and then call the midwives putting them on speaker to have them walk us through it. No 911 or L&D calling unless there IS ABSOLUTELY an emergency (which an iminent birth is NOT) like fever, hemmoraging, baby not breathing, etc.
We are not planning a UC- but it very well may happen given I have a separated pubic bone and LOTS of room for a fast descent. I believe that having someone attend is a VERY good choice. I would have a homebirth via midwife if we could afford it, unfortunately a majority of the midwives here I would trust expect to be payed by 39 weeks (around $3,000+) and we CANNOT afford that. Still, the UC is very very attractive to me as a better choice than hospital births.
No, I don't think it is as safe as an attended birth.
I am not a midwife; I had my last baby in the hospital/birth center attended by a midwife and I'm hoping for a home birth next time.
When I gave birth to my son (normal, pretty awesome birth), I had a retained placenta and PPH. I started to lose it - I became uncooperative and totally "out of it." My midwife and husband had to hold my shoulders while my OB (her husband) performed a manual removal of the placenta. It was scary, and in a UC situation, I don't think I would have made it.
My husband could not have held me AND reached inside me (plus he does not know how to manually remove a placenta; it's a delicate manouver), and even though I have the theoretical/book knowledge, I could not have instructed him. Not to mention, my baby, rather than being cuddled by a nurse, would have been alone and crying, further adding to distraction.