Forum home› Pregnancy› Labour & birth
🚨 Advance warning 🚨 This forum will be closing on 1st May – please see our pinned thread for more information.

Home birth risk report criticised

fairythaliafairythalia
in Labour & birth
I received an interesting article this morning from 'Nursing Times'; might be of interest to you ladies! xxx

http://www.nursingtimes.net/5017902.article?referrer=e1

I think it is terrible to publish a report that is clearly not 100% evidence based and especially as it doesn't focus on UK and standards here. This is the sort of article that could scare women and bullies them into a hospital birth, which is not neccessary! :x

Replies

  • breighlinbreighlin
    I am just quoting something out of the original article.

    The research incorporated 12 studies and 500 000 births from several industrialised nations (USA, Canada, Australia, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Switzerland). The data show that planned home births to healthy and low-risk mothers compared with planned hospital births in the same group of women doubled the risk of neonatal deaths (0????2% vs 0????09%). And when infants with congenital defects were excluded, the risk of neonatal mortality tripled. The main attributable factors for the increase in mortality were the occurrence of breathing difficulties and failed attempts at resuscitation????????two factors associated with poor midwife training and a lack of access to hospital equipment. In the USA, for example, only a third of home births are accompanied by a certified midwife.

    The study includes USA, Canada, Australia, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, not the UK. Also it talks about that the main attributable factor is not having a certified midwife there. In the UK you will have two midwifes with you when you give birth at home.

    I think the media are always taking something out of contest and putthing their own spin to it. The original article is not as scary to read as the link you gave Fairy. image I tend not to believe things in the news and do my own research anyways.

    I come from the Netherlands by the way, where it is completely normal to have a homebirth. You get a sort of doula with you, who takes care of the house for the first week after birth as well and helps the mum with breastfeeding, cooking, cleaning and everything that is needed. Sometimes I think they have the better deal with aftercare. image
  • fairythaliafairythalia
    I agree the original article is a better read than the nursing times edit, but it still makes me mad. It is just irresponsible journalism! Sounds like we could learn a lot from the netherlands! x
  • mummabear-72331mummabear-72331
    The media doesnt surprise me at all. It just fuels the general opinion of the nation (wherever you may be). Im in oz and planning a 2nd homebirth with my 2nd pregnancy (1st was in London and it was amazing). While I had 2 certified independent mws the first time, Im only able to have 1 this time round due to the lack of availability! But Im considering having a doula as well. The general opinion regarding homebirth in this country is far worse than what I found in the uk, but at the end of the day I know that my choice of having my baby in a comfortable environment without medical intervention, providing I continue to have a low risk pregnancy, is not compromising the safety of my baby then that's all that matters. I have sat by and watched many of my friends here go down the ob-lead route, only to end up being scheduled in for induction (on their due date!!!!!!!!!!!) or c-sects! And then they are encouraged to stay in hospital for a week (fair enough if after a c-sect)! It's so sad that they actually think they NEED to be in hospital all that time (because some dude with a stethoscope around his/her neck said so!) but each to their own so I keep my mouth shut.

  • clareabellaclareabella
    How about the facts that if you're in hospital you're more likely to 'require' medical intervention?!

    I hate the response women get when they say they want to give birth at home (I got all sorts of comments when I said I wanted my second at home, and little support from my family who thought I should be in hospital). I hated the fact that with my second I had to go in to hospital because of 'increased risk' to me and my baby due to a long labour, until the moment I was told that I was very relaxed, when in hospital i just couldn't wait to get out of the place!

    I want to have this baby at home, but have been told it may not happen and I felt absolutely devastated when I was told this.

    With proper care home births are safe as a fully trained mw should be able to spot any complications developing and get you into hospital if needs be!
  • moonandstars-88968moonandstars-88968
    I read another article about this, in which the head of the Royal College of Midwives hit back at the original Lancet article. She said she was concerned at the misogynistic tone of the original Lancet editorial - the guy who wrote it said that "women have a right to choose what happens to their own bodies but they do not have a right to put their unborn child at risk" (or words to that effect). She also said that in the last year there have been lots of anti-home birth articles like this one, which she believes is in reaction to a study done in the Netherlands supporting home births (good old Netherlands, they seem so clued up!). In effect she was saying that a whole heap of MALE doctors had got their knickers in a twist over the Netherlands study because it threatened the status quo and so had set about making out that women who birth at home are putting their lives at risk.

    As Vic Reeves once said......95% of all statistics are made up.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Featured Discussions

Promoted Content