Thoughts on "planned home births are associated with double to triple the risk of infant death than are planned hospital births." - Page 9 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-06-2013, 11:57 AM
 
IdentityCrisisMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,680
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mothercat View Post

This was on huff post live yesterday and is a very succinct  summary of the issues.

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/home-birth-statistics%2C-fetal-deaths-%26-injuries/51479633fe344411590004ba

I listened to the whole show and disagree that this is good summary of the issues. I disagree with using Dr. A as the expert for this show - I would much prefer someone less openly anti-HM.  Her perspective is so obviously warped and her representation of HB midwifery is absurd. I've checked her site on many occasions and she is deliberately misleading about the few cases that I have any knowledge about. Just as she was deliberately misleading on this interview. I have extrapolated from there that she is just generally biased and willing to mislead in order to promote her bias. 

 

That said, stories of the mother's experiences is helpful to hear and understand. ANY mother who chooses a "hands off" type MW (or any prenatal care for that matter!) HAS to advocate for themselves and their baby and they must research their choices. One thing I take from this video is that the trust and bond one has with their MW can sometimes prevent a family from making a fully informed choice. I agree that the MW plays a role in that and am sympathetic to these mothers for the way they were mislead for their births.

 

And, falsifying medical records - wow!  I'd be out for blood.  

 

Then the interviewer saying that 20 months ago there wasn't much information on HB? Really? headscratch.gif

 

As for the MANA studies goes...I admit that I don't understand that issue and would be open to a whole thread on the subject (I started one a few years ago and it didn't really go anywhere).  


Mama to DD September 2001 and DD April 2011 *Winner for most typos* eat.gif
IdentityCrisisMama is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-06-2013, 12:07 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)

nm ...

fruitfulmomma is online now  
Old 04-06-2013, 01:57 PM
 
mwherbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 5,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

and I am going to persist in being a pest about this -- there are tricky ways that neonatal mortality is being skirted-- so I think that there needs to now be an expanded definition of birth related deaths and instead of logging  only the first 28 days it needs to be  clearly defined   -- here is a CDC report on neonatal and infant mortality and you can see that the first 4  causes of infant ( post neonatal) mortality are birth related- either anomalies or just not able to survive but live longer than 27-28 days   - so home birth deaths post neonatal mortality what do they look like are there just earlier deaths and less post neonatal deaths?    

 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_05.pdf

mwherbs is offline  
Old 04-06-2013, 03:45 PM
 
mothercat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SE MI
Posts: 1,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I didn't mean to imply that Dr. Amy should be considered an expert on the subject of OOH birth. It was her comments about the education level of many CPMs/DEMs/ LMs/ practical and community midwives that illustrated what has been said in several places throughout this thread. No other country in the world allows a woman to call herself a midwife without having a formal education.  There are women in those countries that will call themselves midwives because they are present with women when they give birth, but WHO/UNICEF calls them traditional birth attendants. According to baseline information from the State of the World's Midwives  from WHO/UNICEF, the maternal and infant mortality rates improved substantially when these TBAs received additional training and education provided by formally educated midwives sponsored by government agencies and NGOs.

 

I have seen several threads in the midwife forums here on MDC and on other midwife lists that I belong to where apprentices and midwives in the US are asking about moving to another country and practicing as a midwife there. When midwives from those countries reply, the reply is almost always, "If you are a CM or a CNM, shouldn't be a problem. However, if you aren't, then you will need to take classes and attend a training program to come up to our standards." And other than the Netherlands, the home birth rate in most European countries is 0-2% of births, at most.  For all the midwives working in those countries, the vast majority attend births in hospitals. Whether DEM or CNM, they attend the same university midwifery education programs and clinicals side by side.  DEM in other countries means only that the midwife was not a nurse before attending midwifery school, it does not mean that she has a different education. The prerequisites for entry to the midwifery education programs include the same science classes, and the program length is longer for the DEMs because they need to be educated in much of what their nurse counterparts already have learned.


Wife, mother, midwife, triathlete
mothercat is offline  
Old 04-06-2013, 04:17 PM
 
IdentityCrisisMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,680
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwherbs View Post

and I am going to persist in being a pest about this -- there are tricky ways that neonatal mortality is being skirted-- so I think that there needs to now be an expanded definition of birth related deaths and instead of logging  only the first 28 days it needs to be  clearly defined   -- here is a CDC report on neonatal and infant mortality and you can see that the first 4  causes of infant ( post neonatal) mortality are birth related- either anomalies or just not able to survive but live longer than 27-28 days   - so home birth deaths post neonatal mortality what do they look like are there just earlier deaths and less post neonatal deaths?    

 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_05.pdf

I have wondered about how the prolonging life for just a short while impacts the stats, if that's what you mean. But, thinking more on that, it seems like there would be indicators of this in earlier deaths for HB babies. I mean, wouldn't a death that happened at home before 28 days be identifiable as a death that would only be slightly postponed with intervention?  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mothercat View Post

I didn't mean to imply that Dr. Amy should be considered an expert on the subject of OOH birth. It was her comments about the education level of many CPMs/DEMs/ LMs/ practical and community midwives that illustrated what has been said in several places throughout this thread. No other country in the world allows a woman to call herself a midwife without having a formal education.  There are women in those countries that will call themselves midwives because they are present with women when they give birth, but WHO/UNICEF calls them traditional birth attendants. According to baseline information from the State of the World's Midwives  from WHO/UNICEF, the maternal and infant mortality rates improved substantially when these TBAs received additional training and education provided by formally educated midwives sponsored by government agencies and NGOs.

Hum...

 

We will have to agree to disagree on whether that link was a good way to illustrate some of the points regarding midwifery training. I pity the novice who is getting their HB information from that link. 

 

I know the issue of DEM/CPM/LM minimum standards is discussed a lot. What I always wonder when I read those minimum standards is if any MW out there is actually working with anywhere close to the minimum. And, if so, who are hiring these MWs?  If what you're saying is that you think the US system has untrained MWs to the point where we can improve infant mortality by further training MW's, that's fine but my limited experience and knowledge makes me think that this is not the only problem - not by a long shot. 

 

I think improving transfer care would have a much greater impact on the safety of HB, for instance. Many of the tragic cases that I've read about seem to indicate reluctance to transfer as a factor.  This is NOT to say that I excuse a MW's reluctance to transfer. I don't. I think it's inexcusable to put a clients welfare behind any issues with legality or complications associated with hospital transfers. Period. But, I also don't excuse a hospital for not offering the standard of care to a patient just because they started birth in the hospital. And we know that we see this. Our city just saw a huge malpractice case over inadequate care for a HB transfer mother. It's a two-fold problem. 


Mama to DD September 2001 and DD April 2011 *Winner for most typos* eat.gif
IdentityCrisisMama is offline  
Old 04-06-2013, 05:47 PM
 
mothercat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SE MI
Posts: 1,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by IdentityCrisisMama View Post

 

I know the issue of DEM/CPM/LM minimum standards is discussed a lot. What I always wonder when I read those minimum standards is if any MW out there is actually working with anywhere close to the minimum. And, if so, who are hiring these MWs?  If what you're saying is that you think the US system has untrained MWs to the point where we can improve infant mortality by further training MW's, that's fine but my limited experience and knowledge makes me think that this is not the only problem - not by a long shot. 

 

I think improving transfer care would have a much greater impact on the safety of HB, for instance. Many of the tragic cases that I've read about seem to indicate reluctance to transfer as a factor.  This is NOT to say that I excuse a MW's reluctance to transfer. I don't. I think it's inexcusable to put a clients welfare behind any issues with legality or complications associated with hospital transfers. Period. But, I also don't excuse a hospital for not offering the standard of care to a patient just because they started birth in the hospital. And we know that we see this. Our city just saw a huge malpractice case over inadequate care for a HB transfer mother. It's a two-fold problem. 

 

 ACOG tried to say in one of their anti-homebirth press releases tried to blame the home birth movement for the US ranking for infant mortality. I don't know how they could say that with a straight face given that the home births rate has been a steady 1-2% annually over the past couple of decades.

 

As for your point about transfer of care, I think it was the Netherlands study which showed that a large contributor to the deaths and injury there was related to problems with transfer. It was mostly a problem of communication and continuity of care. The correct information was not transferred from midwife at home to the midwife or OB at the hospital, or that the information was not correctly interpreted and acted on by the receiving provider. So yes, it is a two-pronged problem.


Wife, mother, midwife, triathlete
mothercat is offline  
Old 04-06-2013, 05:49 PM
 
Buzzbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

"Our city just saw a huge malpractice case over inadequate care for a HB transfer mother."

 

Was that the one where the trial judge excluded all evidence from the jury that the mother had attempted a homebirth?

 

The transfer issue is a big one.  Imagine a bridge being built for months and months over a large river and you are hired (without having any choice in the matter) for the last couple hours of construction to finish it.  In addition, you are required to accept responsibility for whether the whole bridge stands or falls.  Finally, the owner of the bridge doesn't want you there either and is suspicious of your motives, expertise, experience and advice.

 

I think, in the end, that midwife education and appropriate licensing standards (having the midwife be an educated provider who is able to spot difficulties early and does not wait until "trainwreck" status to transfer) and malpractice insurance maintained by the midwife (so the OB is not the sole deep pocket) would solve a number of transfer difficulties. 


I support homebirth that meets the qualifications set forth in the AAP's 2013 policy on homebirth.

Buzzbuzz is offline  
Old 04-06-2013, 05:51 PM
 
Buzzbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I thought the Netherlands study showed that midwives were having difficulty appropriately risking out patients?  I'll have to look at it again.


I support homebirth that meets the qualifications set forth in the AAP's 2013 policy on homebirth.

Buzzbuzz is offline  
Old 04-06-2013, 06:11 PM
 
IdentityCrisisMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,680
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)

Buzzbuzz, I know you feel very strongly about HB and that we come from this at different angles (and sources, I suspect). I am happy to concede that a birth that has prenatal care and the first stages of labor at home provide for some limitations as far as hospital care. A la your bridge analogy. That's not what I'm talking about.  


Mama to DD September 2001 and DD April 2011 *Winner for most typos* eat.gif
IdentityCrisisMama is offline  
Old 04-06-2013, 09:23 PM
 
IdentityCrisisMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,680
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)

Mothercat, you seem to me to be a good source for balanced information (well not that last link...giving you a hard time orngtongue.gif).wink1.gif orngbiggrin.gif I wonder if you wouldn't share your take on the whole MANA statistics issue.  It seems to come up a lot and every time I read it I'm always a bit confused how it came to be such a scandal.  I remember pouring over info about it when I was re-researching.  I went through the pages on how to apply for the information.  It didn't seem secret in the way that some sources imply.  I also didn't see if they ever said what they were going to do with the stats - if they said they would be public and then did an about face, another thing that is implied by some sources.  What's your take on it?  


Mama to DD September 2001 and DD April 2011 *Winner for most typos* eat.gif
IdentityCrisisMama is offline  
Old 04-06-2013, 10:29 PM
 
mothercat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SE MI
Posts: 1,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

It has been discussed a lot lately in some circles. I did MANA stats beginning back in 2006. Have had a couple of very long discussions with Peggy Gardener who used to be the chair of research and conversations with the guy who did support for those entering stats.

 

For me personally, when I did stats it was me, the midwife, entering them as I figured that would be the most accurate. I have since found out in some practices the midwife assigns this task to a student, apprentice, or volunteer without supervision from the midwife. It brings up questions of the accuracy of what's entered. In some cases, the person entering the data knew that what they were told to enter did not accurately reflect what had actually occurred at the birth. All of that is hearsay, but important to understand why there may be cynicism  about the accuracy.

 

The bigger issue seems to be the way MANA is handling access to the stats.  After they published the 2007 data, MANA encouraged midwives to continue entering data because it was an ongoing project and they promised they would allow researchers access to what had been entered. They had a written process  for those presenting project ideas and I remember seeing a press release that there were 2 or 3 people who had applied for access, but I have never heard that anything was actually published.

 

Which brings us to the current issue. MANA now has almost a decade of data and there are complaints that MANA is not releasing any of the data. This leads to suspicion that the data does not show what MANA had hoped it would show and they are trying to find a way to manage the data  so it shows the safety of OOH. Not just  home births, because some of the midwives like myself also do births at birth centers.  Again this is all conjecture.

 

However, the state of Oregon asked  for  the data  that pertains to their state and MANA  would not or could not release the data.  It isn't like the states don't have access to the aggregate data for their state, but I don't know if any of them are releasing the summary data they have.  This is a quote from MANA in their information about what will be done with the data: "State midwifery organizations that have an account can see overall data for all of their members together, but not data for each individual midwife in the organization."
 

So, the short answer seems to be that the data may not be secret, but no one is talking about what the data shows.


Wife, mother, midwife, triathlete
mothercat is offline  
Old 04-06-2013, 11:34 PM
 
mwherbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 5,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Malpractice is not the main issue, if it were then places like the Netherlands would not be having trouble with transfers - probably something to do with cluture... Like the studies that show workers in department stores - resent and even prevent customers from purchasing things in their departments-
What happens when a mom has a good relationship with one physician in a practice but not the others, the docs dont honor each others practices for the most part , so why would they honor a midwife,s practices or what the clients want- the same kind of problems exist for things outside of birth, it is just that most of the time the people involed are ill or injured.
Stuff like nurses treating doctors like they are to not be desturbed or that no one should waste the doctors time- and with this system they are the gate keepers of when the doc is called- i had a friend and student that use to work full time in an OB unit, when entering doctors orders into record most of the time the words were illedgible and my friend would call the doctor and compalin and get clairfication- the others were mad that she would dare waste his time- they had been deciphering his stuff or trying to for years- So for a transfer say that you call in to the charge nurse, and the last time a home birth came in the mw reported something dramatic but it turned out that she was wrong- so she decides to wait and allert everyone until she asseses the situation herself - we have transfered failure to progress moms in while everyne was still fine but things werent changing- so the nurses try all their tricks before the doc is called in to give his 2 cents and get preped for a surgery- if the baby was not stable they may have listend to us or they may have did all their stuff anyway.. I would hope that some of them would pay attention fast it just isnt aways predictable. These are basic disconnects that wont get better till something else changes-
We have states and providers that have malpractice and they really dont have any better outcomes because of it.
mwherbs is offline  
Old 04-06-2013, 11:42 PM
 
mwherbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 5,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
You cant get current year stats that specific even from the CDC- because the parties can be identified

And because of that I was wondering about he 6 losses last year in Oregon, are the numbers true? i have had hospitals file duplicate birth certificates for babies I have transfered - and that includes all the blinded data, so we may be able to stop the baby from getting 2 birth certificates. Although one time that even happended, there is just enough difference in the data, like hospitals always claim no prenatal care on the info they fill out on our moms even when they have made copies of our records----
mwherbs is offline  
Old 04-07-2013, 04:52 AM
 
IdentityCrisisMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,680
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)

It doesn't seem to me that malpractice is a strong factor in terms of safety either, mwherbs. Though, doesn't FL require malpractice from their MWs? That seems an easy enough comparison, right?  Maybe those who feel malpractice could improve safety could do some research on that. This is not to say that I don't think malpractice is a bad idea, necessarily. 

 

Thanks for that feedback MotherCat.  After I wrote the question I went back to the MANA site - they do have a response to some of the accusations as well as their application for information and links to research that has been done with their stats.  At one point they do acknowledge some room for improvement on the communication front. I relate to the suspicions about how they make information available but I also relate to some of their concerns. I had a feeling you could offer a balanced (IMO) opinion on the subject.  Thanks! 


Mama to DD September 2001 and DD April 2011 *Winner for most typos* eat.gif
IdentityCrisisMama is offline  
Old 04-07-2013, 06:32 AM
 
mothercat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SE MI
Posts: 1,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwherbs View Post

We have states and providers that have malpractice and they really dont have any better outcomes because of it.

 

I would like to comment on the reason that states and some consumers are pushing for OOH midwives, whether CPM, CNM, DEM, LM whatever to have liability insurance. Liability insurance seems a less charged term and is the correct term for the insurance that is required. Malpractice implies that someone is to blame and that negligence occurred. Liability implies responsibility for actions. I know, it's all semantics, but bear with me.

 

I am not trying to be cold, but the finances may be vastly different if a baby dies vs being permanently disabled. If the baby is a stillbirth, the family has the unexpected costs of the funeral. If the baby is in the NICU for days or weeks and then dies, the family may have insurance that pays for a good part of that, but not unusual for the NICU charges to be more than $1000.00/ day.  If the baby survives that lengthy stay and is discharged, but permanently disabled, the family's expenses continue for years or decades. The family may have insurance, but they will still have copays and deductibles and may have thousands, or tens of thousands of dollars, a year in out of pocket expenses. If the parents don't have insurance, or the working parent who has insurance loses that insurance, how is the child's care paid for? It becomes a state problem as that child will then qualify for Medicaid. Now the state will be paying the full costs of caring for that child. Depending on severity of the condition and the child's medical fragility, this care may be hundred of thousands of dollars a year. A single, severely and permanently disabled child would wipe out any cost savings from every other child born in that state at home birth with midwives, and would do that in very short order.

 

I know all about the "deep pockets" argument. If the midwife carries liability insurance it makes her a target for a suit by the parents. This makes the parents sound like they are just greedy. But if we look at it from their POV, they are bearing the sole financial responsibility for the care of that child and they were not the only ones responsible for the decision making that resulted in that condition. If the midwife, or any provider, made poor decisions regarding mom's or baby's care, then they should share the consequences (financial burden) also. And it isn't just the finances. The provider pays once and can walk away. The parents have the chronic grief, the day by day intimate look at the result of their decisions. For me personally, just trying to imagine what they go through every time they look  at their child is overwhelming. I don't have the courage to spend more than a few seconds in that space before I feel crushed by it. And they go through it every moment of every single day.

 

Liability insurance isn't just about the midwife, but it is about accountability for her actions. It may not improve care. I know that is a frequent argument about why midwives shouldn't have to carry liability insurance. I haven't looked for studies that prove or disprove that statement. IMHO if the midwife feels she provides excellent care, then carrying liability insurance probably won't change a thing. If she does carry insurance, she may at least have a second thought about her decisions and  decision making. And if she doesn't have the good sense to improve the way she practices, then at least the family will have a bit of money to provide care for the child they will have to care for for a long time.


Wife, mother, midwife, triathlete
mothercat is offline  
Old 04-07-2013, 07:21 AM
 
krst234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 120
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

So many topics coming from this thread!

 

re: MANAstats.

 

I remember being at the MANA conference when they announced that they would be using the data collected so they could "show the excellent care that midwives provide."

 

Now, I do think many midwives provide excellent care, and strive to provide excellent care, but I don't think the objective of data collection should be do demonstrate a foregone conclusion. The purpose of data collecting is to evaluate practices, and outcomes, and to make recommendations of changes to practices so that outcomes can be as good and as safe as they can be.

 

It's like MANA was missing the piece about research where the burden of proof lies in demonstrating that a hypothesis is true, not that all data will naturally support the hypothesis.

 

I agree with Mothercat on a number of other issues with MANAstats - the entry of data is not mandatory, so results would be incomplete. Also, it's very important to assure accurate data collection - YES many students and apprentices enter data - I can attest to that! - I have reviewed data entered by other apprentices - and boy howdy! It was a mess. So I really question if any reliable information could be gleaned from that dataset.

 

I decided as an apprentice that I would not contribute to MANAstats when I became a midwife because I felt the survey questions were prone to error in reporting, did not measure concrete data, and very subjective. To me, contributing to that dataset would lend credence to a very poor methodology of data collection, and professionally I hold myself to higher standards than that.

 

That was long before the issue came up about MANA withholding their data from the public. I have to say, I'm not surprised that MANA is reluctant to release their data.

krst234 is offline  
Old 04-07-2013, 02:08 PM
 
mwherbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 5,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Again the CDC wonder pages are just now publishing 08 info, data sets that are more current run the risk of identifying info- the same would be incredibly true of mana stats- and I knew the details about one of the deaths in the Johnson and Davis study, even though it occured in the midwest far from me the details were unique enough . The CDC also does some back checking trying to match birth and death records the info is NEVER 100% correct.

MANA stats- i think it is a great idea that needs more refinement - perhaps specific training and a gate keeper type of system where data entry could be done but not entered until reviewed by someone with authority . Some states it is manditory to use MANA- stats, and i wish my state would have done that instead the state will be keeping the info tabulated, the top reason will be to simply fine us , secondly with the AZ state president of ACOG as the advisor it is to harvest the data and put the worst spin on it possible---

The Oregon info was so vague that it really didnt help to identify what might need to be improved or changed- what if it is something like GBS guidelines need to be followed,or a change in how we monitor, or that primary health risks of the mother, or that UC births do have some higher risks.... The intention to birth at home question is not very useful and depending on how answering that was taught to the folks filling out the data may still in all not be accurate- it depends how someone who has an accidental birth outside of hospital presents the info to who ever is filling out the paperwork- if you think CPMs that have students enter mana stats can be way crazy just sit in on a filling out a birth or death certificate workshop- and it is not the everyday worker who is at the workshops but the managers....
mwherbs is offline  
Old 04-07-2013, 03:03 PM
 
mwherbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 5,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Here is a worktable on neonatal and post neonatal deaths that occured in 2007- what is illustrative on this table is that by day or groupings of days the death rates are presented- so there are totals for day 2,3,4,5,6-13..... And from days 28- 1 month.... This 2-3 day period has a very high death rate... And is not part of the neonatal death stats...

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/MortFinal2007_Worktable264a.pdf
mwherbs is offline  
Old 04-07-2013, 06:55 PM
 
mothercat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SE MI
Posts: 1,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwherbs View Post

And because of that I was wondering about he 6 losses last year in Oregon, are the numbers true? i have had hospitals file duplicate birth certificates for babies I have transfered - and that includes all the blinded data, so we may be able to stop the baby from getting 2 birth certificates. Although one time that even happended, there is just enough difference in the data, like hospitals always claim no prenatal care on the info they fill out on our moms even when they have made copies of our records----


  Can you explain why you think with a number that small( the losses) that there would be inaccuracies?  I understand the point about duplicate birth certificates. I understand that rarely one may get through, but I think someone would notice if they have two birth certificates with all the same data on it. So it would be pretty rare.

 

However, the numbers for losses is so small that I can't believe that someone what not have noticed that. Ms. Rooks seemed to have enough information reviewing the death certificates that she explained how she handled  the one death that included anomalies.

 

Your thoughts and explanations would be appreciated.


Wife, mother, midwife, triathlete
mothercat is offline  
Old 04-07-2013, 08:21 PM
 
mwherbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 5,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Have the facts been checked? How? With the births being just last year probably every midwife or mom could say so
There is a unique issue with anyone who attends births outside of the hospital- how is double filing avoided or prevented when there is overlap?

Mothercat you say you do birth center births how are you sure your clients that you transfer are not having double filing?
What i have been told in my state after complaining about it for years is well you have to be sure to complain to the instution ---- well that is if we catch that they are making a mistake. I actually believe that EVERY single transfer they file a birth certificate for..



So the numbers arent what the midwives would be making mistakes filing- but filing by a hospital a birth certificate for a baby that has already been born at home or a birth center-
mwherbs is offline  
Old 04-07-2013, 09:03 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)

Mwherbs,  are you saying that if a transfer occurs and paperwork gets dbl filed by both midwife and hospital that there is a potential for a baby who dies to be counted as two homebirth deaths instead of one?

fruitfulmomma is online now  
Old 04-07-2013, 09:03 PM
 
mothercat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SE MI
Posts: 1,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwherbs View Post

Have the facts been checked? How? With the births being just last year probably every midwife or mom could say so
There is a unique issue with anyone who attends births outside of the hospital- how is double filing avoided or prevented when there is overlap?

Mothercat you say you do birth center births how are you sure your clients that you transfer are not having double filing?
What i have been told in my state after complaining about it for years is well you have to be sure to complain to the instution ---- well that is if we catch that they are making a mistake. I actually believe that EVERY single transfer they file a birth certificate for...

 

Things may be different in Oregon, although I doubt it. But in the two states I cover, the birth must be registered within a month of the birth, preferably within 5 business days.

I have only had once in 12 years where the hospital offered to file a birth certificate for a baby that was born OOH,  and mom needed hospital care in the immediate postpartum. It was amazingly simple to avoid a double registration. The parents just said , "No".  I explained to them that I am legally required to file the birth certificate as I was the attendant at the birth. 

The parents know this because we discuss how a birth certificate gets filed during the 36 week visit. So when the birth certificate lady came by at the hospital to have them fill out the paperwork, they politely explained the legalities and that was the end of it.  In order for the hospital to file a birth certificate (a duplicate), the parents would need to at least answer the questions and then sign the form as the "informant". If there is no parental signature on the form, the hospital cannot file a birth certificate.

 

BTW: I assist families at both home and the birth center I own.


Wife, mother, midwife, triathlete
mothercat is offline  
Old 04-08-2013, 08:58 PM
 
mwherbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 5,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
We have a 7 day deadline- not 7 working days 7 days from the birth. We file paper- hospitals file direct-via-computer. So they arent taking in a sheaf of papers for the parents to fill out, at some point the parents have to sign something- but have you seen what they have to sign, probably a dozen things not including the billing info...
mwherbs is offline  
Old 04-11-2013, 08:39 PM
 
mwherbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 5,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I talked with someone in Oregon and 2 of the deaths were second twins...

The births and deaths occured after transfer to the hospital- except for one baby was born at home.
mwherbs is offline  
Old 04-12-2013, 07:10 AM
 
Buzzbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Failure to appropriately risk out, huh?

 

And people thought I was crazy to schedule a c-section for my mono/di twins. 


I support homebirth that meets the qualifications set forth in the AAP's 2013 policy on homebirth.

Buzzbuzz is offline  
Old 04-12-2013, 10:32 AM
 
Serenity Now's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Free and easy wandering.
Posts: 361
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)

What if this data IS correct? What if the numbers from Colorado (3 times increase in death) and Oregon (6-8 times increase in death) is reliable, accurate info. Then what, as far as homebirth and homebirth advocacy go?

Serenity Now is offline  
Old 04-12-2013, 11:03 AM
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I would really like to see homebirth midwives be honest about what training they have and about the risks of homebirth, and ethical about risking people out. I think a woman should be able to choose a homebirth if she meets the guidelines, but she deserves full information. 

 

The current world of homebirth advocacy would need to undergo some fairly major changes. 

erigeron is offline  
Old 04-12-2013, 11:05 AM
 
Escaping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 659
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serenity Now View Post

What if this data IS correct? What if the numbers from Colorado (3 times increase in death) and Oregon (6-8 times increase in death) is reliable, accurate info. Then what, as far as homebirth and homebirth advocacy go?

 

I would still not be very concerned. It's like when my car insurance tells me I'm 3 times more likely to die in a red car than a white car so I have to pay more if I own a red car. It may make a difference to them statistically based on what personality types and age groups prefer certain colours, but to me, I'm the same driver no matter what colour the outside of my car is, so I wouldn't consider myself any more or less safe in a red car vs a white car. 

Escaping is offline  
Old 04-12-2013, 11:36 AM
 
Serenity Now's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Free and easy wandering.
Posts: 361
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escaping View Post

 

I would still not be very concerned. It's like when my car insurance tells me I'm 3 times more likely to die in a red car than a white car so I have to pay more if I own a red car. It may make a difference to them statistically based on what personality types and age groups prefer certain colours, but to me, I'm the same driver no matter what colour the outside of my car is, so I wouldn't consider myself any more or less safe in a red car vs a white car. 

What if you find out a red car has between a 3 and 8 times greater risk of suddenly exploding, would you still buy the red car? Would you still tell others to buy a red car?

Serenity Now is offline  
Old 04-12-2013, 12:05 PM
 
Escaping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 659
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serenity Now View Post

What if you find out a red car has between a 3 and 8 times greater risk of suddenly exploding, would you still buy the red car? Would you still tell others to buy a red car?

 

To be honest, yea, I'd still buy the car if that was the car I wanted. The risk of any other car suddenly exploding is pretty close to nil, so between 3 and 8 times nil is not very concerning to me.

 

As for telling others what kind of car/birth to have, I consider that none of my business. 

Escaping is offline  
 

Tags
Popular On Mothering In 2013 , Homebirth , Homebirth Safety , Natural Birth And Homebirth , The Essential Homebirth Guide For Families Planning Or Considering Birthing At Home
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off