This is B”N my last post on the matter.
big deal,
Do you think it is possible to take a minute and think for yourself without quoting statistics or medical journals who are trying to push an agenda? Your logic is so twisted it would be laughable if not so serious a subject.
I’m guessing you tuned in at my last post. I encourage you to read the rest if interested. It’s fair to say that I am wrong – there are two legitimate sides to this debate – but I have not twisted my logic. Also, you think I haven’t thought about this? I used to be firmly on the opposite side of the issue!
By the way, the Green Journal quoted in my post above is the official journal of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. If they had an “agenda”, it would actually tilt against home births! If a research paper in their journal establishes that monitored and screened home births are a safe option (which was the conclusion of the paper), then I think that can be taken as an unbiased source. And mothers choosing that option should not be shamed by people like you any more than mothers who opt for C-sections out of convenience or fear of pain, based on evidence that that procedure increases both fetal and maternal risks.
Can you figure out any reason why they might be screening candidates for a planned home birth? Because they know that there is a significant risk with delivering at home so they try to minimize the casualties.
I actually agree with the vast majority of this statement, though not the wording. It’s apparent that you are not following my position on the issue, either because of a preconceived notion of my position, or because you’ve just arrived to the thread. Screening and fetal monitoring are a vital part of a planned home birth, IMO. It would be unwise to not undergo such screening. Home birth is definitely not for everyone. By the way, “they” try to minimize casualties in hospitals too:-)
The reasonable argument here is whether the medical mitigation of risk available at an established LOW RISK home birth attended by certified nurse midwives with a transfer plan to a nearby hospital is as good as being on site at the hospital from the start of active labor. My contention is yes. Others contend no. The only way to find out is through research – the statistics and medical journals you disapproved of my citing.
I know that our upbringing in this country is to automatically assume that risks in hospital < risks at home. But these assumptions can be verified through studies. To this point, nobody has offered clear evidence that the very specific form of home birth I am describing has greater risk than a hospital birth.
In the Netherlands, home birth is the norm. Hospital births are utilized in higher risk situations. Their neonatal mortality rate puts the U.S. to shame. This wouldn’t be the case if home birth “tripled” or “exponentially increased” the risk to the baby.
I don’t know what your experience with birth is. But I can tell you that anyone that is semi educated or responsible that was in a delivery room knows about the many surprises that come about.
A not-so implicit insult – which was uncalled for.