But honestly, your posts come across anti-homebirth. Not everyone would choose homebirth in every circumstance. Personally, I would not feel comfortable having a twin or breech delivery at home. I do agree with you that the stats that say homebirth is safe do not include twin or breech deliveries so it's really not proven to be safe in those circumstances.
However, if you want to say The Skeptical OB is correct (which is what the OP is about) then that's where we disagree. Homebirth has been demonstrated to be a safe option for most women. Most women are in fact low risk. Most women are expecting one baby, and only 4% of babies are in breech presentation....
^Basically this (save for the fact that nikkijames and I have a different feeling about birthing twin or breech at home).
The posts DID come across as anti-homebirth....which is fine, if somebody feels that way they feel that way. But I can only tolerate (personally) a couple of pages of that on a thread in the homebirth forum. By the time I get around to page six or so and we've veered completely off topic and are discussing whether or not there are risks associated with getting epidurals and I'm being called a "NBC type" and the research that I have accepted as correct (that I have based some pretty important decisions on) is being smugly dismissed as trash...well, I get a little testy, sorry.
You're not showing me anything new, Mambera...you're citing old research...either, imagining that I haven't read it (which insults me) or that I did read it and, what? I'm an idiot for not believing it? What? You know many of us here believe very strongly that the chemical cocktails and workings of hospital procedure (and the environment itself) lead to intervention after intervention and, in many cases, to c/s....30-60% of the time, to be precise, depending upon what hospital you're lucky enough to live close to and what demographic you happen to fall into.
Homebirth, believe it or not, is not always the easiest choice. Many women here have to sacrifice, pay out of pocket, endure ridicule from family and strangers alike, etc to have a homebirth....and they don't do it because they are "Thrill Junkies". They do it, because they research and study and come to the conclusion that it is the place for them for safety, spiritual or any number of other reasons. To come here and casually dismiss those choices as being based on false evidence and trash research while citing studies (which, thanks Mambera, many of us here have definitely also read - and dismissed - you're not some super genius, stunning us with crazy research we've never bothered to look for) that many, if not most, in the NBC view as flawed, is silly and insulting.
Whatever the reason, it's a legal, valid choice. Not only that, but a person has a right to hang out in the forum that has been designed for positive and supportive exploration and discussion of the choices they've made and enjoy some peace. Discussion of the blog posted at the beginning of this thread is fine....but six pages of the same few people coming back over and over again with "yeah, it's actually not safe" and "yeah there's no such thing as the cascade of intervention" and basically continuously and smugly dismissing many of the arguments which serve as the basic underpinnings of a series of pretty serious decisions that mamas here are making, is not fair. I don't go over to the c/section forum and cite research that IMO proves that for many women VBAC is a safer option than repeat c/section.....while also casually citing research that underscores the major and minor risks associated with c/s for mama and baby. Why would I do that? Right? It's just stupid and disrespectful, right? Yes, right.
Mambera, I don't have a damn thing to post for you. I'm not going to waste a single moment of my time digging around in my computer files for research to cite or prove anything to you. I don't need to do that. You've most likely read a lot of what I've read (and agreed with) and have dismissed it as silly. I've read at least some of what you've read (I'm not going to try and guess at how much, as I couldn't begin to try and determine how much of your research may have been done on such awesome sites as the one posted at the beginning of this thread) and I don't generally agree with most of it. If it is your belief that breech HB is inherently unsafe and that twins must always be "delivered" at hospitals, I can promise you we're agreeing with different research. I didn't ask for your studies, don't personally care for the Cochrane studies you cited and think they are flawed for several reasons. An article from the New England Journal of medicine is really not very impressive to me, either...I would have to find and open up the specific article you mentioned to see if it is one I have read.....but a lot of what is published in journals and what is held as "generally agreed upon fact" in the medical community gives me the creeps for how completely unscientific and idiotic it is. In fact, most of the ways in which the modern western medical community approaches health, healing and natural life events such as death and birth absolutely shock and disgust me. I can think of a number of times, right here on MDC, where articles exposing the fraudulent and extremely suspicious nature of funding for major studies in the areas of birth and newborn health/care have been posted. I can even think of a couple of times (mainly to do with vaccines) that whole articles touting the safety and efficacy of a certain medicine, in "peer reviewed" medical journals, have been exposed as being written entirely by the companies that manufacture the drugs in the article.
I'm not saying doctors are always wrong, I'm not saying the journals don't hold information worth reading...I'm saying don't come here and throw around studies we've already read and expect that just because they are "highly regarded" in the medical community means that the flaws in them are not apparent to some of us on the other side of the discussion or that we'll all feel compelled to accept the validity of said research/articles because they are published by nationally recognized institutions.
The reasons I HB go so far beyond "cascade of intervention" and "miniscule elevation in risk" type conversations. The same goes for non-vaxxing, non-circ'ing and even homeschooling, etc. These are not just political decisions, based on the trend of the year. My mother gave birth to four children naturally. Her mother, two. HER mother, many more than my mother, her mother and ME combined. These choices I make, are based on research, yes, and much of it.......but they are as deep as my soul. These are spiritual decisions for me. Very deeply spiritual decisions.
So your tone, demeanor and insulting insinuations are just a bit much for me. I've done my research. It's not research you agree with. The forum I'm in is pretty supportive of and in alignment with my belief system. There is a forum on these boards about which you could say the same. Hint, you're not currently posting in it.
Unsubbing from this thread. Way too hormonal for this kind of thing right now. Sorry.