It DOES seem to me that throughout this thread, there is a lot of "something can go wrong and so a hospital is the place to be" fearmongering.
There are people on this board that have made it clear that they are so afraid of the birthing process that the only place they would deliver is in a hospital. And I'm glad that if they are that afraid, then this is what they chose because if you're freaking out, you will NOT be able to pay attention to what needs to be done and you need someone to do it for you--even if it comes at a fluctuating 30-50% c-section rate because for them, hospital births are clearly the safer choice. For them a possible hospital trauma or tragedy is preferred over any other birthing tragedy because they would rather it be made by the "knowledgable" professionals than themselves. And I would NEVER EVER tell them different.
However, the rest of us on this board do seem to be lumped into an all or nothing polarizing side which we are NOT advocating--which is clear from the responses on this thread alone. We don't seem to be saying NO HOSPITALS EVER, we seem to be saying that the risks could be better IF the hospitals would stop interfering so much. And they're right. We choose this route for many reasons, sure, but then so are the many reasons to choose a hospital birth. You have to remember that it was we rebels that caused strange practices like no husband at the births and being strapped down to a table and drugged out of our minds with twilight sleep to stop being common practice. We still have a long way to go.
And for the record, there are NO reliable studies on the safety of well-planned unassisted births to compare to hospital births. Believe me, I checked. ALL of the "statistics" are estimates and theories based on too wide a scope to be useful--such as death rates in third-world, impoverished, unclean countries and whatnot. Look further for yourself. We ONLY have rates for midwife assisted births.
I think it would benefit those who feel the need to weigh in on the dangers of unassisted childbirth if they would understand what we are ACTUALLY saying, and understanding that we are NOT saying this is the right decision for everyone--ESPECIALLY those with KNOWN high risk factors. It's ironic that those afraid of UC would tell us that we HAVE to accept the many unsafe and unproven practices or they are going to question our sanity. It's strange to me further that they keep saying "well, that was 100 years ago in the medical field" and it's much safer now. But, that's not what we're finding out. It stands to reason that if they were practicing unsafe procedures 100 years ago and they continue to become safer, then they are still practicing unsafe procedures NOW and it will become safer in 100 years more. This is the same logic that the DANGER group is using. If it was unsafe to give birth 100 years ago, then it is still unsafe to do it now and yet THAT particular thread of logic is widely accepted, and the other is not. I can't help but wonder if it isn't the DANGER group that's turning a blind eye to facts instead of us.
I doubt the DANGER group will listen. That's fine. But I can't help but be amused by some of the stories I hear my grandmother tell me about her births. She STILL can't get over the fact that husbands/partners are allowed in the delivery room or that breastfeeding is best. My mother in law can't handle the fact that her daughter's OB no longer suctions babies mouths and noses routinely, even though her grand-daughter was delivered in a hospital. It's just funny to me that we UCers (or attempted UCers) are accused of shunning "new" break-throughs and technologies when many of the things we speak out against are very VERY slowly and sporatically becoming routine in the hospitals now.