or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Homebirth › Considering Homebirth? Think Hard....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Considering Homebirth? Think Hard.... - Page 6

post #101 of 159
p.s. As a homebirth midwife, I do disclose that I don't carry malpractice.
Malpractice is NOT the answer. A country that cares about People is.
post #102 of 159
Having had the evening to think it over, I think maybe I can explain to guvly why he is not getting the response he expected.

1)

This audience: With what I'm trusting were the best of intentions, guvly, you did the equivelent of walking into an NRA convention and announcing that guns are dangerous and folks really ought to reconsider ever picking one up. Looking for women who were "considering" homebirth, you instead waded into a sea of homebirth veterens, midwives, doulas, and activists. You chose a title that reminds me of a headline in a magazine that would send me flying to write the editor and cancel my subscription, and you preceded to make an argument that would have so little impact on my decision that it took much reading for me to even understand you.

2) The risks of birth: Childbirth has been killing women for millions of years. And for just as many millions of years, babies have been born suffering from problems that occurred during their births. This is not a risk of homebirth, it is a risk of all birth. It is the risk we take by the very act of reproducing. It is a high-stakes game: the prize is the continuation of humanity, and the penalty may be death.

I do not choose homebirth because I underestimate the risks of birth. I choose homebirth because I feel the risks of birth are not as great as the risks of hospitals. I do not choose to recklessly birth in harms way, I choose to birth in the safest place I know: my home. My home is not filled with powerful germs, toxic chemicals, or hundreds of strange people, and no one at home will cut me, drug me, or scare me. Instead at home I face only the natural risks of birth, the risk that my body will fail me in some way and the outcome will not be good. I am choosing the danger I am most willing to face.

3) Malpractice: There is an attitude at large in the world today that everything that goes wrong is somebody's fault. For people who feel that way, the first response to tragedy is to decide who to sue.

The risk of birth does not belong to doctors and midwives, it belongs to mothers and babies. The risk of birth is part of life and a price we pay for continuing life. We go to professionals, seeking their services, to help us with our births. No professional can prevent every bad outcome and no professional can do flawless work every time. It is a hard fact of life but nonetheless a fact of life that not every birth can go perfectly, no matter how skilled or wise a professional who is assisting may be. And no one, not parents, not doctors, and certainly not courts, can say for sure what might have been. You are absolutely correct that birth is risky. And we all are painfully aware that tragedies do happen. And it is true that midwives are not easy to sue for malpractice. But your are incorrect in assuming that I, or the majority of women you will find here, by this will be either surprised, or influenced.
post #103 of 159
T

Quote:
Originally Posted by kavamamakava
What did your midwife have to say about insurance denying the benefits? I have only lived here for 9 months so I may not have my facts straight. But that was my understanding. I had a very difficult time finding a midwife with the experience and philosophy to match my own. I asked the one I finally chose why there were no experienced midwives around. She told me that it's because of the situation with insurance covering midwifery which mandates that practicing midwives MUST have malpractice insurance. She said it can be very expensive and prohibitive to staying in practice as a homebirth midwife. So good luck finding someone WITHOUT malpractice insurance :/ There may be some wise and experienced underground midwives out there but I don't know how to find them. At least the one I found has been attending or delivering babies since she was a teenager. She got her state license and WA state practice set up only a few years ago in 2001 though.

That's interesting, I was told that WA midwives do NOT have to have mal.ins....hmm. Oh, but if they don't then health insurance won't pay, so it is a "have to" situation if you want your clients to get reimbursed, but it isn't a real "have to". Hmm.

For full info, the insurance co said they didn't *have* to cover homebirth and they didn't cover CPM/LMs...they said they wouldn't, but they ended up covering some of the care.

My midwives were skeptical. I couldn't remember what they said exactly when I called the insurance company, and the insurance guy made me cry (he was so mean!) and then I couldn't remember what he said to tell them.

But what was funny is that either they messed up or my first midwife was sneaky b/c she has some hinky set of initials after her name on the insurance website...she's a CPM/LM but is a preferred provider somehow. But the midwives I fired her for (who are also CPM/LMs) weren't preferred providers, and I was told it was b/c they weren't CNMs. I didn't want to pursue it b/c then it might mean they'd take back all the prenatals they'd covered with my first midwife.

The insurance guy said the midwives had to be overseen by an OB to be a preferred provider, and the midwives said that their license said they didn't have to, that the insurance co was askign them to practice outside their license...but then it turned out that they WERE consulting with OBs as the pregnancy went on (uncomplicated but went to 42 weeks), would have had to consult more, and consulted during my long labor (if I'd wanted an OB near my birth I would have hired an OB).

As it stood, I can't talk to my midwives anymore; they sent back 500 of their fee for the postnatal visits they did NOT provide, and when Robert told them to submit their bill (we had prepaid so this was to reiumburse us) to insurance did cover a little over 500. So that's about half their fee covered, but all without really "telling" GW that it had been a home birth, well, labor.

We're not going to push it and have to pay all that back...it would be great to get the other chunk of money, but...it's just not worth it.
post #104 of 159
Thank you for your posts, loved and misfit. SO TRUE!!
post #105 of 159
misfit! Awesome post! You hit the nail on the head.
post #106 of 159
Well, I was going to post my opinions on this topic, but I would just be repeating what misfit said (and doing a poor job of it, misfit, you said exactly what I wanted to say but couldn't get out ).

And I also agree that people need to start taking responsibility for their actions and decisions. I am truly appalled at how many people place the blame on someone/thing else when the decision was theirs and theirs alone. (I'm not referring to the woman whose child has cp, just generally speaking here) Even simple comments inadvertently place blame somewhere else. For example, I had an external version 2 weeks ago (36 weeks)b/c I was wanting to avoid a c/s at all costs. This was completely my choice, yet the first time I told someone that I had it done, I found myself saying "I had to have an external version...." Once the words came out of my mouth I corrected myself, "We chose to have an external version b/c..." There's a big difference between the two. Anyway, enough of my rant. Applause to all the women here who take responsibility for the decisions they make!!!
post #107 of 159
: : :
just came across this thread...didn't have time to read it all yet, but did you know that the german word for troll is "troll"?
post #108 of 159
I read all the thread now. Wow. I think i can conclude with that home births are not for everyone, i think. I could not do it, cuz i would stress too much about "what if there is something wrong" or "what if i loose a lot of blood or have total rupture" who will fix me then? I think i could not be able to face that, if something happens at home. I rather be safe in the hospital with midwifes and if neccesary doctors. But same time, glad i am not in the US, cuz it seems like docs there do things just to save their asses, somethimes. It seems as they like to overrule mothers, from what i read here, and other places. But same time, if you are alternative enough, maybe you dont like to hear what is best for you medically speaking, you just wanna trust your instinkts and do what ever suits you. Like that woman in America whos babies died because she refused a c-sect or something, even if it was medically neccesary.
post #109 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by mittendrin
: : :
just came across this thread...didn't have time to read it all yet, but did you know that the german word for troll is "troll"?
The norwegian word for it too. Here, a "troll" is a fairy tale creature. And they are very Norwegian. lol.
post #110 of 159
Quote:
Like that woman in America whos babies died because she refused a c-sect or something, even if it was medically neccesary.
Totally T but that baby died from being exposed to drugs.
post #111 of 159
Drugs as in mother was an addict, or drugs during birth?
post #112 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nabbe
I think i can conclude with that home births are not for everyone,
True. They are only for at least 95% of the poplulation. Unless you or baby have some pre-existing serious conditions that could effect the birth, home is the safest, hospital is the riskiest.

Quote:
I could not do it, cuz i would stress too much about "what if there is something wrong" or "what if i loose a lot of blood or have total rupture" who will fix me then?
If you were bleeding a lot your midwife would give you herbs or a shot of pitocin (if she carries it). If you had a uterine rupture your midwife would be able to see the early signs because you wouldn't be on any drugs and she would transfer you to the hospital. Midwives know much more about birth than doctors. Your body births much better at home. Complications are very rare at home.


P.S. Guvly, please click on the link in my sig.
post #113 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nabbe
Drugs as in mother was an addict, or drugs during birth?
Apparently the baby tested positive for cocaine. There are long threads about it in TAO.
post #114 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greaseball
Apparently the baby tested positive for cocaine. There are long threads about it in TAO.
Yup. And she refused a c/s after two or three OBs recommended one. Not just one knife happy OB, but after a second and possibly a third opinion. She had mental problems and had already been sliced open to deliver a previous baby. It sounds like she may have been fearful of another surgery. She was using cocaine. This wasn't your normal birth.
post #115 of 159
But still, how can she refuse?

When i had my son, they recomended me a c-sect. cuz of his size, but i denied, and gave birth. I dont regret it though. With my daughter it was the same, and she was first. But she was born face up. If she would have been born at home, maybe she would not have survive, cuz it can be dangerous to be born face up.
post #116 of 159
None of the midwives I know have ever had a problem with face up babies. It's really no big deal.
post #117 of 159
Quote:
But she was born face up. If she would have been born at home, maybe she would not have survive, cuz it can be dangerous to be born face up.
How so? More difficult, maybe, but not dangerous, unless manipulation with forceps is used. Some babies are just meant to be face up, just like others are meant to be breech. With my last baby she was face up at 37 weeks so we did things to turn her around, and it ended up being a very difficult birth. They explained that some babies don't do well in the sought-after LOA position and that it might have been better to let her stay posterior.
post #118 of 159
One thing that I wanted to say about malpractice (and forgive me if I'm repeating someone, because I didn't read the whole thread), when I was checking out midwife schools I asked about carrying malpractice insurance and I was told "in Oregon midwives cannot get malpractice insurance. However, a person who chooses a midwife, especially a homebirth midwife, is generally a person who is educated in the ways of her body and fully ready and capable of taking responsibility for herself and her birth." So, so true. If you are not willing and able to accept that bad things can happen durring birth, regardless of the place, than yes, you absolutely should have your baby in the hospital where you can sue your little butt off if something happens. Really, the hospital is the perfect place for a sue happy person to deliver, the likelyhood of something bad happening there is far higher than it happening at home with you in control.
post #119 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nabbe
But still, how can she refuse?

When i had my son, they recomended me a c-sect. cuz of his size, but i denied, and gave birth. I dont regret it though. With my daughter it was the same, and she was first. But she was born face up. If she would have been born at home, maybe she would not have survive, cuz it can be dangerous to be born face up.
Dangerous how? Sunny side up often involves more pain and/or back labor, but more dangerous?
post #120 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nabbe
But still, how can she refuse?

When i had my son, they recomended me a c-sect. cuz of his size, but i denied, and gave birth. I dont regret it though. With my daughter it was the same, and she was first. But she was born face up. If she would have been born at home, maybe she would not have survive, cuz it can be dangerous to be born face up.
The same way you refused. She said no. Maybe she thought that her baby would have been just fine, just like yours was.

Also, like the others have said, being born face up is not dangerous, just more painful to deliver.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Homebirth
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Homebirth › Considering Homebirth? Think Hard....