But just moving, getting in a car and travelling in labour can effect the natural process of it. Adrenaline kicks in which inhibits the oxytocin (hormone for labour). At home (if that is your preference obviously) then you're likely to be more relaxed, feel safe, and your labour will progress as it should. As others have said the mw is there and at the first sign of things not being normal then they will act.
If I had any medical issues then I'd be the first to be in hospital but for a low risk pregnancy then home feels safer for me.
Estrellita- I have upmost respect for midwives, they do an incredible job. But there is a reason why there is MW led care for uncomplicated pregnancies and labours, and then consultant led care for higher risk. Midwives are very knowledgable and experienced, but there is so much they are not allowed to do, so many reasons why people get moved mid labour from mlu to consultant led. That is what I meant.
Mrs 50s - to me the health and safety of my baby is The most important thing. I don't try to imagine the long term emotional damage to mothers who have problems with birth, but I would have thought all mums would say the safety of baby is most important and whatever had to happen to them to get baby out safely is the most important thing. For example my worst nightmare would be a GA for a CS . Lots of women on here have had to go through that, I can't imagine how hard it must be to deal with having no memory of your baby being born or not being able to hold them, it must emotionally scar them for life, but I'm sure they are thankful that they were in a hospital and got to theatre in time for everything to be ok with baby. That was the only option to get baby out safely and so as much as it must be hard for them, I'm sure they would rather that and have a healthy baby.
Absolutely JT, that's why my responses have been based on a straightforward, low risk Mum and pregnancy, would never have considered homebirth with any risk factors as few people would. I don't think anybody wants anything other than a successful outcome and healthy baby, that goes without saying but obviously for some people labouring and delivering in a medicalised environment/setting has its own risks. Each to their own, as with so many things.
Again I'll reiterate that I think home is the WORST place to be if you are anxious about it, so absolutely understand why some posters can't get their heads round it. I can't get my heads around why people would put their babies in their own room as early as they do, or why some women plan on bottle feeding from the start (which in my eyes is very different from trying to breast feed and then having to switch to FF for whatever reason) - it makes no sense at all to me, I really can't understand the logic - but it's right for some families.
I consider myself very lucky that I have a very pro-homebirth midwife team, a supportive husband, so far an uncomplicated pregnancy (shocking sickness and SPD, but that only affects me, not the baby), have been able to hire a doula who is also an independent MW and who banks for the local hospital (so will be another constant should we have to transfer). I also consider myself very lucky that I have no hospital or surgery or needle fear - if I need to go in and have a c-section, I'll have it. I have no 'worst fear' other than something happening to my baby, so I have not chosen homebirth over hospital birth out of fear (which I think is very important as well).
I am choosing it because I genuinely believe it is actually safer for me and my baby.
See I'm also looking at it the wrong way probably but I find that having a home birth is taking a mw away from hospital. Often on wards mws have 3 or 4 women they are dealing with, yet someone who decides to give birth at home gets 2 mws. I just think that hb can mean use of more services when there may not needed to have been if they started off in hospital in the first place. So for example the use of an ambulance, which if in hospital you don't need that, often the issues are more pressing as people have been out with hospital, so require input from more senior drs etc whereas they could have been managed by a mw in hospital and interventions put in if needed.
Disclaimer, iv been on nightsso this may read as gobblydegook.
I haven't read all replies but if it wasnt for doctors god knows what would have happened to both myself and baby. I'm sure but can't prove it that a midwife caused me to have an infection (yes through breaking my waters which might not have happened if I had went into labour naturally) but more importantly the senior midwife was arguing with a doctor (no idea if it was a registrar or what) that I needed an emcs straight away. The midwife disputed this and wanted me to continue and she was over ruled and to be blunt thank god she did get over ruled as I might not be holding my baby today. I had been in established labour for 11 hours, had stalled at 4cm despite having regularly contractions, both myself and baby in distress and she wanted me to f**king continue! So midwifes don't always get it right.
Tp same here (kind of) we proved that 2 mws were incompetent. One couldn't examine me as had finger surgery, and the other refused to let me go for section when L was distressed! I was semi conscious and she said if I just had 10 more minutes then I could get baby out (Ls heartbeat was dangerously low) the registrar over rules her, she threw her gloves at the dr and marched out of theatre (leaving me, the person who needed her support, with no senior mw) we naturally complained and took it to executive level, L was showing distress for 40mins before a dr was even called! Thankfully she was disciplined and retrained in some areas but if she was attending me at home then I'd not have L
That's not meant to scare longer anyone sorry, its just to show how far that mw was prepared to get me my 'natural' birth
It's shocking that midwives need over ruled in the first place and don't know enough to realise when enough is enough. My H even told the midwife that I needed fluids as I was heading for an infection (she said I was fine) then he i did need fluids and he said I needed more pushed through quickly (again she said no). Both times he was right.
Obviously there's good healthcare professionals and bad ones, I've met a wide variety!
Re the cost thing cp, at a home birth they don't automatically open u the various medical kit whereas they do in hospital, quite often binning a lot of it unused I would imagine. Also it's different teams so it doesn't take midwives away from the hospital, there's still midwives there if people go to hospital but there's community midwives for those having a home birth.
It was saying on the midwife programme how expensive c sections are, I know for a lot of people they're a medical necessity and I'm so glad they exist (I was born by crash section) but the rates have increased, why?
It's not something I'd ever consider, I'm far too risk averse, and scared of the unknown - I needed/wanted to be near a hospital and doctor who could tell me all was normal (I underatand a MW would come out much further into labour than I went into hospital)! However I've been thinking about this, and whether being at home would have been any benefit.. I can think of positives and negatives TBH,
I ended up with a Csection, and the same would have happened regardless of where i'd be, however I wonder if being at home would have meant they'd have examined me better/closer and the 2 MWs would have known before I got to hour 40, that E wasn't going to be able to get out.. I would still have had to be transferred to hospital for the CS but I guess I might have got there first.. Then I think, E wasn't distressed (was a cat2 section, as she just simply wasn't going to come out), but would the stress of the transfer had made her / me distressed.. A major concern for me was the car journey as we were 30mins away..
I agree it's a personal choice. I wanted a honebirth but H didn't so we compromised on mlu but in the end I had meconium so we had to go to delivery suite. I laboured at home however and in hospital had wireless constant monitoring so could move about. I also chose No pain relief and didnt want it regardless of whether it was there or not, it had no effect. In the end it was fine and if I'd have been anywhere but delivery ward my baby would have died so for me that shapes how I feel were I to have anymore. Once you've seen how close to death mother and baby can become I think you would never again consider not being near all the equipment and specialists.
I was low risk throughout v healthy etc but you just never know. In fact I think on many occasion the labour is completely unrelated to the pregnancy. And you only need to take the intervention and pain relief and labour style you want. Drs can't force you if you don't want it so just say no. You wouldn't be tempted to drink a bottle of wine when pregnant if you didn't want so why take pain relief you don't want. Just resist if you feel strongly enough.
I wouldn't judge anyone's choice but I do think its easy to get carried away with thinking easy pregnancy and not wanting intervention means you will have an easy birth and be ok at home. You just are lucky if it all goes well wherever you give birth i think.
I loved my homebirth. I had a stress free, normal pregnancy and had a normal birth at home, surrounded by my own things with easy childcare and no fuss. It was blissful. If it isn't for you it isn't for you.
My son was a big baby, we knew that, I was young (20) and very, very happy to leave myself in the hands of the experts. I elected for the local hospital (one of two hospitals, there were no other options) and planned to simply do as I was told, when I was told.
I went very overdue and was unwell and depressed. The hospital standards were so very low, I was borderline pre-eclamptic and they keep forgetting to take/test my urine and were super-busy. They sent me home twice (second time I was more than 2 weeks over) so eventually I had a tantrum and told them I would NEVER have my baby in their hospital. My GP talked a lovely kind registrar in to letting me give birth at another hospital outside of our district. They induced me, labour was straightforward and quick. 9lbs 5. He needed help due to late pethidine, but nothing the MW couldn't sort.
Then on the ward I struggled. I struggled to feed and we got nowhere, I was uncomfortable and desperate to go home. I couldn't sleep properly and wanted so much to be with my husband. 36 hours after he was born he still hadn't fed properly but we worked on them and they let me home if I promised a) have my mum stay at my house to assist (was never gonna happen) and b) to return early if no progress. Within a minute of getting in the door at home successful feeding started, we bonded and it was a dream from then on.
This time around. I love my house. It's not fancy but I love it. My favourite room is my bedroom. I can see the sea. I find it calming. It is my sanctuary, always. Having had an easy birth I couldn't imagine anything more wonderful than our baby being born in our new home. I wouldn't be away from my son, or my dog. Everything of mine would be on-hand. I'm not scared of hospitals but already my emotional state at the thought of a home birth is a thousand times more positive. I believe the mental welfare and attitude of the mother can go a long way toward influencing the labour/birth.
Then there's the 'putting your baby at risk' thing. I'm not one of the militant mums. I was shocked to hear about the 'new' SIDS guidelines, some of you may remember. I don't/didn't follow all the pregnancy rules, and I did things my own way a lot with my son, particularly where feeding was concerned. I don't consider I would be neglectful to consider a home birth, if the pregnancy progresses well. If it doesn't I will DEFINITELY have to choose the MLU at the hospital. It doesn't have a good rep and it would worry me, but it is better than ignoring potential problems.
I do have faith in the midwives. In my previous labour there was a junior doctor from the states, and, gorgeous though he was the only good he did was pummelling my back to ease the pain and him working up a sweat gave my husband a rest! The midwives had it in hand. I get the impression they are cautious, and trained to hit the 'panic' button (without panicking, lol) much earlier than would otherwise happen in hospital. They want mother and baby in the right place, if things start to concern them, as much as anyone else.
I am perfectly aware we may need to transfer, we've talked about the 20 minute journey, car/ambulance options, etc. I would prefer to have tried a HB and had to yield than to skip it and maybe feel resentful if I find the hospital experience as upsetting as last time. I am not someone whose mind defaults to worst case scenario, most mums I know had a very uneventful birth and didn't need anything more than midwifery care. I am not a fan of the school of thought of 'you'll always wonder whether you could have saved your baby's life, by doing X, Y, Z differently'. I am generally comfortable with my decisions, I tend not to be a risk-taker. I
Counter I've been to work and come home to return to this thread and what you've written sums up really eloquently how I feel about it all as well, thanks for sharing your experience and thank you QoK for a really thought provoking thread, have enjoyed it x
I would never consider a hb. I am being pushed to use the MLU this time as i had a straightforward birth with P. It's not attached to the hospital and would be a 20-30minute transfer away. If i could be sure of a birth like P's then i'd go there but there are no certainties in childbirth. The 30 second wheelchair ride from ante natal to delivery 30 minutes before P was born was horrific, why would i want to risk being in an ambulance for any amount of time?!
To me, in any pregnancy, it's an unnecessary risk. And i'm a bit of a risk taker in general. Things might be no more likely to go wrong at home but the response if they do go wrong is NOT the same. I had a very unmedicalised (not even time to pick up the flippin gas and air) birth in hospital with 1 mw (who was my community MW throughout my pregnancy) and i will be going back again this time.
I had a couple of inept midwives look after me in hospital, then a decent one was sent in when it was thought M needed a forcep delivery. She was brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. Listened to me and actually helped me avoid intervention. If I could choose a midwife this time around I'd have her thanks very much. I'd hate to think I'd be at home with crap midwives, and no one there to step in. I'm probably a bit risk averse though and don't see the point in taking any unnecessary chances.
This thread just shows how different we all are though.
To go off on a tangent, slightly, how long do you labour for before going in even if you want a hospital birth? If you are home birth is there not a chance you've got a couple f midwives hanging around you from an earlier point than you would have if you were going for a hospital delivery? I was induced with M so no experience of labouring at home
I didn't read through every reply in detail as short on time but I find it really tough to answer threads like this anyway.
This is all my personal experience and not to scaremonger. I'm just putting it down. It's sensitive too so don't read if you think it will upset or bother you.
My first birth was a low risk, uncomplicated birth in a MLU. My son suffered severe oxygen deprivation during labour which led to him eventually passing away the day he was born. There were no pointing risk factors, I was 26, healthy, no complications during pregnancy, started labour naturally at 6 days overdue. The investigation apparently suggests it happened in the last 8 minutes of my labour (debatable) and if this was the case I would be more than this away from my local hospital if I was at home. I don't think people realise just how quickly birth can escalate into an emergency situation. In fact my consultant the next day told me this which will forever stick in my head. Birth is a normal natural thing but it is the most dangerous thing you as a baby will go through. Being born is a very dangerous part of life.
I think it's easy to forget that because it happens all the time every day all over the world. And yes, we managed for hundreds and thousands of years just fine but there are lots of things we dd back then that we wouldn't do now. If there is medicine for an illness, we take it. If you need an operation on your leg, you take it. I don't see it as much different if I'm honest, although I appreciate this is probably an extreme opinion that doesn't reflect the majority.
I went on to have two completely medicalised births (sections) and had no problem with this. The main thing was my babies were here safely not how they came into the world. When. Was pregnant with Theo I was so worked up about the perfect birth. The perfect birth is the one that gets your baby safely in your arms however that is for you.
I was a lurker on the PP when you lost Theo Pip, I remember it well (in fact I kept coming back to check in on you for ages), thank you for sharing xxx
the responces have made a very interesting read, I find it particularly interesting the people who have changed their minds between births. of course its everyone's choice to do what they feel is right for them and their baby but I struggle with the 'women have been doing this for centuries' answer - yes they have but the mortality rate was much much higher.
I certainly know my H is over the moon I've changed my mind as he wanted the hospital first time round!
Replies
But just moving, getting in a car and travelling in labour can effect the natural process of it. Adrenaline kicks in which inhibits the oxytocin (hormone for labour). At home (if that is your preference obviously) then you're likely to be more relaxed, feel safe, and your labour will progress as it should. As others have said the mw is there and at the first sign of things not being normal then they will act.
If I had any medical issues then I'd be the first to be in hospital but for a low risk pregnancy then home feels safer for me.
Absolutely JT, that's why my responses have been based on a straightforward, low risk Mum and pregnancy, would never have considered homebirth with any risk factors as few people would. I don't think anybody wants anything other than a successful outcome and healthy baby, that goes without saying but obviously for some people labouring and delivering in a medicalised environment/setting has its own risks. Each to their own, as with so many things.
Echo HF, Isis and E (again!)
Again I'll reiterate that I think home is the WORST place to be if you are anxious about it, so absolutely understand why some posters can't get their heads round it. I can't get my heads around why people would put their babies in their own room as early as they do, or why some women plan on bottle feeding from the start (which in my eyes is very different from trying to breast feed and then having to switch to FF for whatever reason) - it makes no sense at all to me, I really can't understand the logic - but it's right for some families.
I consider myself very lucky that I have a very pro-homebirth midwife team, a supportive husband, so far an uncomplicated pregnancy (shocking sickness and SPD, but that only affects me, not the baby), have been able to hire a doula who is also an independent MW and who banks for the local hospital (so will be another constant should we have to transfer). I also consider myself very lucky that I have no hospital or surgery or needle fear - if I need to go in and have a c-section, I'll have it. I have no 'worst fear' other than something happening to my baby, so I have not chosen homebirth over hospital birth out of fear (which I think is very important as well).
I am choosing it because I genuinely believe it is actually safer for me and my baby.
See I'm also looking at it the wrong way probably but I find that having a home birth is taking a mw away from hospital. Often on wards mws have 3 or 4 women they are dealing with, yet someone who decides to give birth at home gets 2 mws. I just think that hb can mean use of more services when there may not needed to have been if they started off in hospital in the first place. So for example the use of an ambulance, which if in hospital you don't need that, often the issues are more pressing as people have been out with hospital, so require input from more senior drs etc whereas they could have been managed by a mw in hospital and interventions put in if needed.
Disclaimer, iv been on nightsso this may read as gobblydegook.
I haven't read all replies but if it wasnt for doctors god knows what would have happened to both myself and baby. I'm sure but can't prove it that a midwife caused me to have an infection (yes through breaking my waters which might not have happened if I had went into labour naturally) but more importantly the senior midwife was arguing with a doctor (no idea if it was a registrar or what) that I needed an emcs straight away. The midwife disputed this and wanted me to continue and she was over ruled and to be blunt thank god she did get over ruled as I might not be holding my baby today. I had been in established labour for 11 hours, had stalled at 4cm despite having regularly contractions, both myself and baby in distress and she wanted me to f**king continue! So midwifes don't always get it right.
Tp same here (kind of) we proved that 2 mws were incompetent. One couldn't examine me as had finger surgery, and the other refused to let me go for section when L was distressed! I was semi conscious and she said if I just had 10 more minutes then I could get baby out (Ls heartbeat was dangerously low) the registrar over rules her, she threw her gloves at the dr and marched out of theatre (leaving me, the person who needed her support, with no senior mw) we naturally complained and took it to executive level, L was showing distress for 40mins before a dr was even called! Thankfully she was disciplined and retrained in some areas but if she was attending me at home then I'd not have L
That's not meant to scare longer anyone sorry, its just to show how far that mw was prepared to get me my 'natural' birth
It's shocking that midwives need over ruled in the first place and don't know enough to realise when enough is enough. My H even told the midwife that I needed fluids as I was heading for an infection (she said I was fine) then he i did need fluids and he said I needed more pushed through quickly (again she said no). Both times he was right.
Obviously there's good healthcare professionals and bad ones, I've met a wide variety!
Re the cost thing cp, at a home birth they don't automatically open u the various medical kit whereas they do in hospital, quite often binning a lot of it unused I would imagine. Also it's different teams so it doesn't take midwives away from the hospital, there's still midwives there if people go to hospital but there's community midwives for those having a home birth.
It was saying on the midwife programme how expensive c sections are, I know for a lot of people they're a medical necessity and I'm so glad they exist (I was born by crash section) but the rates have increased, why?
It's not something I'd ever consider, I'm far too risk averse, and scared of the unknown - I needed/wanted to be near a hospital and doctor who could tell me all was normal (I underatand a MW would come out much further into labour than I went into hospital)! However I've been thinking about this, and whether being at home would have been any benefit.. I can think of positives and negatives TBH,
I ended up with a Csection, and the same would have happened regardless of where i'd be, however I wonder if being at home would have meant they'd have examined me better/closer and the 2 MWs would have known before I got to hour 40, that E wasn't going to be able to get out.. I would still have had to be transferred to hospital for the CS but I guess I might have got there first.. Then I think, E wasn't distressed (was a cat2 section, as she just simply wasn't going to come out), but would the stress of the transfer had made her / me distressed.. A major concern for me was the car journey as we were 30mins away..
I agree it's a personal choice. I wanted a honebirth but H didn't so we compromised on mlu but in the end I had meconium so we had to go to delivery suite. I laboured at home however and in hospital had wireless constant monitoring so could move about. I also chose No pain relief and didnt want it regardless of whether it was there or not, it had no effect. In the end it was fine and if I'd have been anywhere but delivery ward my baby would have died so for me that shapes how I feel were I to have anymore. Once you've seen how close to death mother and baby can become I think you would never again consider not being near all the equipment and specialists.
I was low risk throughout v healthy etc but you just never know. In fact I think on many occasion the labour is completely unrelated to the pregnancy. And you only need to take the intervention and pain relief and labour style you want. Drs can't force you if you don't want it so just say no. You wouldn't be tempted to drink a bottle of wine when pregnant if you didn't want so why take pain relief you don't want. Just resist if you feel strongly enough.
I wouldn't judge anyone's choice but I do think its easy to get carried away with thinking easy pregnancy and not wanting intervention means you will have an easy birth and be ok at home. You just are lucky if it all goes well wherever you give birth i think.
I loved my homebirth. I had a stress free, normal pregnancy and had a normal birth at home, surrounded by my own things with easy childcare and no fuss. It was blissful. If it isn't for you it isn't for you.
Ooh, enjoying this thread!
My son was a big baby, we knew that, I was young (20) and very, very happy to leave myself in the hands of the experts. I elected for the local hospital (one of two hospitals, there were no other options) and planned to simply do as I was told, when I was told.
I went very overdue and was unwell and depressed. The hospital standards were so very low, I was borderline pre-eclamptic and they keep forgetting to take/test my urine and were super-busy. They sent me home twice (second time I was more than 2 weeks over) so eventually I had a tantrum and told them I would NEVER have my baby in their hospital. My GP talked a lovely kind registrar in to letting me give birth at another hospital outside of our district. They induced me, labour was straightforward and quick. 9lbs 5. He needed help due to late pethidine, but nothing the MW couldn't sort.
Then on the ward I struggled. I struggled to feed and we got nowhere, I was uncomfortable and desperate to go home. I couldn't sleep properly and wanted so much to be with my husband. 36 hours after he was born he still hadn't fed properly but we worked on them and they let me home if I promised a) have my mum stay at my house to assist (was never gonna happen) and b) to return early if no progress. Within a minute of getting in the door at home successful feeding started, we bonded and it was a dream from then on.
This time around. I love my house. It's not fancy but I love it. My favourite room is my bedroom. I can see the sea. I find it calming. It is my sanctuary, always. Having had an easy birth I couldn't imagine anything more wonderful than our baby being born in our new home. I wouldn't be away from my son, or my dog. Everything of mine would be on-hand. I'm not scared of hospitals but already my emotional state at the thought of a home birth is a thousand times more positive. I believe the mental welfare and attitude of the mother can go a long way toward influencing the labour/birth.
Then there's the 'putting your baby at risk' thing. I'm not one of the militant mums. I was shocked to hear about the 'new' SIDS guidelines, some of you may remember. I don't/didn't follow all the pregnancy rules, and I did things my own way a lot with my son, particularly where feeding was concerned. I don't consider I would be neglectful to consider a home birth, if the pregnancy progresses well. If it doesn't I will DEFINITELY have to choose the MLU at the hospital. It doesn't have a good rep and it would worry me, but it is better than ignoring potential problems.
I do have faith in the midwives. In my previous labour there was a junior doctor from the states, and, gorgeous though he was the only good he did was pummelling my back to ease the pain and him working up a sweat gave my husband a rest! The midwives had it in hand. I get the impression they are cautious, and trained to hit the 'panic' button (without panicking, lol) much earlier than would otherwise happen in hospital. They want mother and baby in the right place, if things start to concern them, as much as anyone else.
I am perfectly aware we may need to transfer, we've talked about the 20 minute journey, car/ambulance options, etc. I would prefer to have tried a HB and had to yield than to skip it and maybe feel resentful if I find the hospital experience as upsetting as last time. I am not someone whose mind defaults to worst case scenario, most mums I know had a very uneventful birth and didn't need anything more than midwifery care. I am not a fan of the school of thought of 'you'll always wonder whether you could have saved your baby's life, by doing X, Y, Z differently'. I am generally comfortable with my decisions, I tend not to be a risk-taker. I
Counter I've been to work and come home to return to this thread and what you've written sums up really eloquently how I feel about it all as well, thanks for sharing your experience and thank you QoK for a really thought provoking thread, have enjoyed it x
I would never consider a hb. I am being pushed to use the MLU this time as i had a straightforward birth with P. It's not attached to the hospital and would be a 20-30minute transfer away. If i could be sure of a birth like P's then i'd go there but there are no certainties in childbirth. The 30 second wheelchair ride from ante natal to delivery 30 minutes before P was born was horrific, why would i want to risk being in an ambulance for any amount of time?!
To me, in any pregnancy, it's an unnecessary risk. And i'm a bit of a risk taker in general. Things might be no more likely to go wrong at home but the response if they do go wrong is NOT the same. I had a very unmedicalised (not even time to pick up the flippin gas and air) birth in hospital with 1 mw (who was my community MW throughout my pregnancy) and i will be going back again this time.
I had a couple of inept midwives look after me in hospital, then a decent one was sent in when it was thought M needed a forcep delivery. She was brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. Listened to me and actually helped me avoid intervention. If I could choose a midwife this time around I'd have her thanks very much. I'd hate to think I'd be at home with crap midwives, and no one there to step in. I'm probably a bit risk averse though and don't see the point in taking any unnecessary chances.
This thread just shows how different we all are though.
To go off on a tangent, slightly, how long do you labour for before going in even if you want a hospital birth? If you are home birth is there not a chance you've got a couple f midwives hanging around you from an earlier point than you would have if you were going for a hospital delivery? I was induced with M so no experience of labouring at home
I didn't read through every reply in detail as short on time but I find it really tough to answer threads like this anyway.
This is all my personal experience and not to scaremonger. I'm just putting it down. It's sensitive too so don't read if you think it will upset or bother you.
My first birth was a low risk, uncomplicated birth in a MLU. My son suffered severe oxygen deprivation during labour which led to him eventually passing away the day he was born. There were no pointing risk factors, I was 26, healthy, no complications during pregnancy, started labour naturally at 6 days overdue. The investigation apparently suggests it happened in the last 8 minutes of my labour (debatable) and if this was the case I would be more than this away from my local hospital if I was at home. I don't think people realise just how quickly birth can escalate into an emergency situation. In fact my consultant the next day told me this which will forever stick in my head. Birth is a normal natural thing but it is the most dangerous thing you as a baby will go through. Being born is a very dangerous part of life.
I think it's easy to forget that because it happens all the time every day all over the world. And yes, we managed for hundreds and thousands of years just fine but there are lots of things we dd back then that we wouldn't do now. If there is medicine for an illness, we take it. If you need an operation on your leg, you take it. I don't see it as much different if I'm honest, although I appreciate this is probably an extreme opinion that doesn't reflect the majority.
I went on to have two completely medicalised births (sections) and had no problem with this. The main thing was my babies were here safely not how they came into the world. When. Was pregnant with Theo I was so worked up about the perfect birth. The perfect birth is the one that gets your baby safely in your arms however that is for you.
I was a lurker on the PP when you lost Theo Pip, I remember it well (in fact I kept coming back to check in on you for ages), thank you for sharing xxx
the responces have made a very interesting read, I find it particularly interesting the people who have changed their minds between births. of course its everyone's choice to do what they feel is right for them and their baby but I struggle with the 'women have been doing this for centuries' answer - yes they have but the mortality rate was much much higher.
I certainly know my H is over the moon I've changed my mind as he wanted the hospital first time round!
www.ridingthestork.com/.../birth-stories-home-birth-katy
My homebirth story if any one is interested
Oh dear, tears streaming down my face whilst at work. Thank you for sharing.