Home birth without a midwife

[MelissafromSyd]

Does anyone know of any planned homebirths that have happened without registered midwives present where the mother or baby had complications or were harmed? Just interested to know if anyone has had any experiences or knows of anyone who has.

[SPC]

I looked after a baby in the UK who died as a result of birth asphyxia. His parents hired a doula, who turned out to be a failed midwife. The baby was an undiagnosed breech, and got stuck. Eventually they called the paramedics, who got the baby out on telephone advice from the midwives at the hospital, but it was too late and he didn't survive.

Home birth in the UK is much more common than here, and in my town about 10% of babies are born at home and all women are entitled to a home birth with two midwives should they chose it. Consequently birthing with anyone in place of a midwife, either a doula or one's husband, is illegal.

To be fair I've also looked after lots of babies who suffered from birth asphyxia from hospital births.

[Freya]

:no::no:

And I have read MANY birth stories as we are planning a birth without a registered midwife in March. Just thought I would clarify I have read of no life or death complications. There have been transfers and small complications but they were all dealt with and all turned out okay.

[meme]

i know of someone that had a tragic homebirth. it's personal, so i don't want to post details without her consent. she had a well respected midwife present.

i also know at least 4 other people who have birthed 6 kids between them, at home beautifully with no complications or tragedy. some with the same midwife, or those trained by her.

[samsausage]

Yes, four I can think of off the top of my head. Not jobs I attended (ambo) but ones my colleagues did.

On balance I've 'caught' far more than that.

[MelissafromSyd]

Just to clarify, I'm interested in knowing if you are aware of any planned homebirths without a registered midwife (freebirth with or without a doula), where the mother or baby had complications or were harmed?

[PunkyDiva]

I freebirthed in March this year, just DH, myself and 5 kids present, and yes, we had complications.

[AM]

I haven't heard of any where mum or bubs were harmed, but homebirth without a midwife does seem far more likely to end in transfer to hospital, either before bub comes, or after... (anecdotally speaking, I have really noticed that trend when reading hb stories) And that is kind of a good thing to see in a way, at least people involved are saying this is going pear shaped for whatever reason, lets transfer. So pretty responsible in my book. :)

[Josh]

I had a homebirth 17yrs ago without any one, no midwife, no hubby, no one just me and my towels and a bottle of water, it was accidental, my hubby was suppose to take me to hospital but was delayed on the road and my DD arrived with just me there, I didn't have any complications, just scared the absolute s**t out of me, that's all:o

[kymmy]

I have read many stories. If you would like a link to some you can pm me.

[fai firinne]

Why do you ask?

[MelissafromSyd]

I'm not "collecting info"! I'm starting conversation about a birthing method, which has been done several times over on this site - we have debated the safety of epidurals, CS, midwifery care, obstetric care - now I'm asking about self care. You have every right to post - or not post - on a thread. If this thread offends you at all, you can post somewhere that does not offend you.

[kymmy]

No care?
Try
Self care.

[AM]

No care?
Try
Self care.

Very well put :)

[MelissafromSyd]

Good point - thanks - I've amended the post to say "self care". AM, I'm not anti freebirth and happily provide freebirth back up.

[Tam-I-Am]

I have deleted a number of posts from this thread. If you feel that you do not want to respond, that's fine - nobody's forcing you to :) But please don't be rude regarding other member's motivations.

[hailsntwang]

Hi

My friend actually free birthed at home two weeks ago. She had herself a water birth (in the kiddies pool) and the only people present were her other two kids and her husband.

Her baby was born with the cord wrapped around her neck. One the cord was removed the baby started breathing (luckily) but it could have ended badly. She has quite a large tear from the delivery but is allowing it to heal naturally (with no stitches).

All is well now and both Mother and baby are still yet to see a doctor.
This baby weighed 4.9 kilos (using their bathroom scales) so she was a big girl to.

This was her second freebirth, the middle child was born unassisted (accidently). She went into labour during a blizzard and the midwife couldn't get to her in time, she gave birth in the shower once again only assisted by her husband. There were no complications with this delivery.

In both occasions her waters didn't break. She had to break them herself using her finger.

[AM]

[COLOR=red]Her baby was born with the cord wrapped around her neck. One the cord was removed the baby started breathing (luckily) but it could have ended badly.


This is a LOT more common than most people realise, and rarely cause for concern, the cord is simply unwound, (my hb bub was born with his around his neck and under his arm, no problem) and babies will often 'pause' before they begin to breathe outside the womb, remember that they are actually still being supported by the placenta via the umbilical cord if it is left in place (as happens in 99.9% of homebirths) and then the transition from relying on the placenta for oxygen to using the lungs is a calm and unhurried one.

In rare cases, yes, it can present more of a problem, but is often seen as a near emergency, when in actual fact, it is normally just a natural part of the birth process.

[Freya]

This is a LOT more common than most people realise, and rarely cause for concern, the cord is simply unwound, (my hb bub was born with his around his neck and under his arm, no problem) and babies will often 'pause' before they begin to breathe outside the womb, remember that they are actually still being supported by the placenta via the umbilical cord if it is left in place (as happens in 99.9% of homebirths) and then the transition from relying on the placenta for oxygen to using the lungs is a calm and unhurried one.

In rare cases, yes, it can present more of a problem, but is often seen as a near emergency, when in actual fact, it is normally just a natural part of the birth process.

Absolutely.


This even happened with my DS in hospital, nurses didn't even bat an eyelid. It is not the emergency some think it is.:no:

[naiwen]

DS cord was wrapped around his neck 3 times and was causing heart decels every time he moved in the womb!

[NibbleCurlynBub]

But Julie.. I didn't think you tried for a home birth.. :confused:

[naiwen]

Nah I was just commenting on the cord around the neck chat.

No homebirth attempts here.

I was nearly born in a car though does that count!

[NibbleCurlynBub]

I don't know.. I don't think we have a thread for car-births. :o

[~Emmylou~]

This is a LOT more common than most people realise, and rarely cause for concern, the cord is simply unwound, (my hb bub was born with his around his neck and under his arm, no problem) and babies will often 'pause' before they begin to breathe outside the womb, remember that they are actually still being supported by the placenta via the umbilical cord if it is left in place (as happens in 99.9% of homebirths) and then the transition from relying on the placenta for oxygen to using the lungs is a calm and unhurried one.

In rare cases, yes, it can present more of a problem, but is often seen as a near emergency, when in actual fact, it is normally just a natural part of the birth process.


Yep. Something like one in three, or might be one in four babies have the cord around their neck or a limb or something. Most often it is a simple matter of slipping it over their heads as they're being born. They aren't breathing at this point so it's not like it's choking them. Complete non-issue much of the time but people freak right out about it like it's super rare and life threatening every time it happens.

My DD had the cord around her neck when she was born, I never even knew until I got hold of my labour notes and it was in there. It happens so often alot of times whoever catches the baby doesn't even mention it.

[kymmy]

My first 3 were all born with the cords around their necks - apparently tightly (according to notes). It didn't seem to effect them.
Not sure what causes it but J didn't have the cord around his neck.

[fai firinne]

Does anyone know of any planned homebirths that have happened without registered midwives present where the mother or baby had complications or were harmed? Just interested to know if anyone has had any experiences or knows of anyone who has.

I personally don't know of a story of a planned unassisted homebirth where there were any complications to mother or baby. Statistically speaking, although the safety rates for unhindered birth are pretty impressive, giving birth anywhere carries an intrinsic small risk, as does driving a car. So it follows that there will be a small percentage of freebirths where something goes wrong, and some day we're likely to hear of a mother or baby dying at a freebirth.

You can read about one baby who died at home (in the USA) here (http://www.christianuc.com/uc/birth_stories/index.php). (This family went on to have more babies at home unassisted.)

I do know, though, about two mothers in the same town in USA who both died during routine caesareans in the same week. This was last year. (Imagine the furore if two mothers in the same town both died during their unassisted homebirths in the same week!) Just last week there was news of another mother in USA dying during a caesarean. I would hope that anyone involved in a freebirth where there is a demise would not be targeted or persecuted, any more than the staff involved in fatal caesareans are.

I also have heard of two midwife-attended homebirths in recent years in which a baby died. The stats for baby deaths during homebirths are comparable to any hospital, but in both venues, it does happen rarely.

My mother was a hospital midwife for 30 years. In that time, one baby died during her shift. (It was not a woman in her care, but she was on duty at the time.) Despite a thorough investigation, no fault was found. Everyone had followed procedure to the letter. Mum noted that following protocol saved staff from punitive action but did not save the baby. I think she began to question the rationale behind some protocols at that point. She was lucky that being part of a system, there were protections in place for her and her colleagues. Independent midwives do not have the same support and protection, unfortunately, and tend to get scape-goated even though complications and demises take place at the same or higher rate in high-tech venues. At least Mum and her colleagues didn't have to worry about being threatened with having all their paperwork taken to the police, law suits, being reported to the authorities etc and other such intimidation games.

In USA, it is quite a sport to witch-hunt homebirth midwives, especially if something goes wrong at a homebirth (this has happened in Ireland and no doubt other countries, too.) Yet the poor peri-natal stats in USA are not because of homebirth. It's bad enough when the AMA does this to midwives, but even more shocking, I once heard of a case of a midwife who tried to prosecute a doula who attended freebirths. She failed, of course, she was trying to say the doula had practiced midwifery unlawfully but of course the doula had never performed any clinical tasks, and among the parents, who were thrilled with their doula's services, no one was willing to speak against the doula. Even though the law suit failed, the harassment and bullying was still extremely stressful for the doula - perhaps that's all this rogue midwife was trying to achieve. Hate to think that kind of horizontal violence could ever occur between women seeking to serve other women. I guess she wasn't the kind of midwife who was much into women's rights and abilities to make their own choices for birth. I was quite disillusioned when I heard about that, thank heavens we don't have that kind of thing going on here. Midwives and doulas stick together in the cause of supporting choice for women.

Has everyone sent in their submissions for the maternity services reform? It's the last day! Even my Mum is doing one. (Go, Mum!) :D

[Lillynix]

I haven't personally known anyone orread a story where a freebirth resulted in any deaths, but I have read a fe stories where there have been transfers either during or after birth, which is pretty damn responsible if you ask me!

With a normal healthy pregnancy, unhindered birth in my opinion, is as safe as bith gets.

[BreithCuidiu]

Has everyone sent in their submissions for the maternity services reform? It's the last day! Even my Mum is doing one. (Go, Mum!) :D

Yes mine was rather hurried, but legible :laughing: I hope we, as women working to serve women, can band together and make a positive change.

[mumofKieran]

You can read about one baby who died at home (in the USA) here (http://www.christianuc.com/uc/birth_stories/index.php). (This family went on to have more babies at home unassisted.)





I couldn't find the story from the link?

[kymmy]

With a normal healthy pregnancy, unhindered birth in my opinion, is as safe as bith gets.

Couldn't agree more.

[fai firinne]

Sorry M of K, it does not seem to be there anymore. It was a few years ago I read it. I think the baby had some congenital defects - not likely it would have survived even if they had been in hospy. I can't find the story there anymore.

I've just waded through 14 pages of Google trying to find anything about babies dying as a result of uc. Page after page of "my baby would have died if we had done uc!" and "I'm just waiting for a news article about a baby dying at a uc" and "my baby nearly died but" ... but I didn't find a single story where a baby actually did die during a uc. Statistically, there must be a few cases of this happening, and perhaps the parents aren't in a frame of mind to be sharing their story on the internet. UC couples come across as pretty independent, well-researched and responsible, though. It's not like a scared teenagersgiving birth in the toilet and abandoning the baby scenario.

I get the impression that the fear of something going wrong at a freebirth is disproportionate to the rate at which actual problems do occur.

There was a thread on BH saying that the rate of baby deaths during UC is higher than the average infant death rate. I have not found any research or statistics that substantiate this claim.

[gentlemama]

So does anyone know of a baby who died or had an adverse outcome when the birth was attended by an obstetrician or a registered midwife?
Usually the easiest way to determine safety in different modalities of care is to look at the perinatal statistics.

[BreithCuidiu]

So does anyone know of a baby who died or had an adverse outcome when the birth was attended by an obstetrician or a registered midwife?



Ummm.... :rolleyes: .... Yes. Actually I could probably write a book.

[MelissafromSyd]

Statistically speaking, although the safety rates for unhindered birth are pretty impressive

Julie, do you have any stats on this? I would love to see them! I have looked and looked, but cannot find any data on freebirth safety - ie, planned freebirth, not babies who are born before arriving in hospital if this was the intended birth place. Hence this thread ....

[MelissafromSyd]

So does anyone know of a baby who died or had an adverse outcome when the birth was attended by an obstetrician or a registered midwife?
Usually the easiest way to determine safety in different modalities of care is to look at the perinatal statistics.


Since most births are attended by a midwife or OB, it only stands to reason that the death rate will be higher with midwife / OB care.

You’re spot on about the perinatal stats – but my thinking is that there are no stats on freebirth. Here’s why: in NSW (not sure about the rest of Aust but I assume it’s similar), the midwife completes a stats form after every birth. Since there is no midwife in attendance at a freebirth, my thinking is that there will be no data on freebirth. Can anyone shed some light? How do freebirthing women notify the dept of health about the birth? If there’s no notification, there would be no stats, and therefore we’d be unable to say with certainty that freebirth is safe. This is me speaking with my scientific hat on!

[mumofKieran]

Even if there were stats available on FB, perhaps the number would be too small to get any reliable info from it anyway. I mean if, say, 10 people FB per year, and 2 babies die one year, it would be a bit unfair to say that FB has a 20% death rate. Likewise if no babies died out of the 10 it may not be accurate to say that there is a 0% death rate overall. I mean, obviously for that particular group it was true, but not for FB overall. You would need thousands of women to get any reliable data. I have no idea how many women FB by the way, this is purely theoretical.

[AM]

It really is a annoying gap in the statistics, but as supplying the stats would be completely voluntary, I can't see there ever being a true reflection of freebirth in any data base really...

I wonder if BDM could somehow collect some even basic stats, at least they would be able to sort the hb's with mw's definitely from the freebirths, and they would have access to the birth and death stats...

I'd love to be able to have some good statistical data to get my teeth into, but for now I guess anecdotal evidence from as large a freebirth community(s) as you can possibly find (there's a few out there...) will have to do for those doing their research.

[gentlemama]

Some of the large homebirth forums keep stats on the birth outcomes of their members. You could try googling for freebirth outcomes in australia and you might find it that way. Of course with such a small group the outcomes have no statistical relevance but I can assure you you're not going to find hordes of dead babies.

[AM]

Of course with such a small group the outcomes have no statistical relevance but I can assure you you're not going to find hordes of dead babies.

Oh, how disappointing! ;) Excuse my gallows humour.

[kymmy]

I wonder if BDM keep such stats (such as how many babies born in and out of hosp)

[AM]

I wonder if BDM keep such stats (such as how many babies born in and out of hosp)

Well they must have the info as part of their record keeping, it just wouldn't be collated in a way that is useful to the likes of us...I wonder if any of it is publicly accessible? Say whether or not you could search their records/archives..

[MilkOnTap]

Well they must have the info as part of their record keeping, it just wouldn't be collated in a way that is useful to the likes of us...I wonder if any of it is publicly accessible? Say whether or not you could search their records/archives..

Thats what I was thinking. I mean - even freebirthers (read: alternative, hippies etc lol) still register their childrens births with BDM. Surely BDM would be able to access stats about who has registered the birth - whether its a hospital, IM or individual?

[mrsdj1234]

I do have that info, but I'm not sure how a layperson could get it.
I know that they do, because on the registration form we got (freebirthed without hospital transfer, so it's a different form) it had a big stamp saying homebirth, and it is also has a spot for the info of the DR or IM that attended (which of course is left blank in the freebirthers case).

[AM]

I wonder how someone, a task force or something could be put onto the job of actually setting up some kind of data base with freebirth info...I guess no-one has ever really been that interested before, but now it is on the rise, and people are freaking out about it, it is about time something concrete were known about it.

I mean, as I said, all the info IS at BDM, it's just a matter of someone going through it all and picking it apart, and collating it into something meaningful...but it would need to be 'officially sanctioned' for someone to get access I would presume...

I wonder who you'd contact to make the suggestion?

[MelissafromSyd]

now it is on the rise, and people are freaking out about it, it is about time something concrete were known about it.

I mean, as I said, all the info IS at BDM, it's just a matter of someone going through it all and picking it apart, and collating it into something meaningful...but it would need to be 'officially sanctioned' for someone to get access I would presume...

I wonder who you'd contact to make the suggestion?

I totally agree! If there was something concrete, it would allay people's concerns.

I'm not sure it would be that hard at BDM to get some stats happening. Just a matter of looking at the form really :) It might work better if the NSW forms (can't comment on other states) were amended so that it was clear that it was a FB or mw-attended HB.

Maybe we could contact BDM to suggest it? Although, the birth stats generally come from the dept of health, maybe there'd be a conflict if BDM also released stats. Especially if the stats conflicted with each other! Imagine if BDM stats had a 4% HB rate and the dept of health stats said only 0.2%!

[AM]

Although, the birth stats generally come from the dept of health, maybe there'd be a conflict if BDM also released stats. Especially if the stats conflicted with each other! Imagine if BDM stats had a 4% HB rate and the dept of health stats said only 0.2%!

Haha wouldn't that be funny! It'd make me trust gov depts even more than I do now... :rolleyes:

Well, why don't we all contact BDM and ask for stats to start being collated somehow, it will be by public pressure that it will happen, and the more people requesting it, the more likely it is for some action to be taken on it, I wonder if Nursing Councils and Midwives councils would also be interested in helping to try to get the info collected...potentially there are a fair few interested parties...

Mind you, as someone else pointed out, the small numbers involved would mean they were not particularly useful to assess mortality rates, and somehow PLANNED hb without a mw would have to be separated from accidental ones, something I don't know how interested BDM would be in doing (however if the health dept wanted it done like that it may be a different story) but the info WOULD be very useful to see exact numbers of hb without a mw, and to see trends from year to year ie increase decrease, percentage of population yada...I guess the longer the info is collected for, the more useful it becomes...

[kymmy]

I do have that info, but I'm not sure how a layperson could get it.
I know that they do, because on the registration form we got (freebirthed without hospital transfer, so it's a different form) it had a big stamp saying homebirth, and it is also has a spot for the info of the DR or IM that attended (which of course is left blank in the freebirthers case).
Is it a different form? I can't remember from the others.

[MelissafromSyd]

I think the form is different in each state.

[BreithCuidiu]

I think that if women want statistics regarding FB, they'll find them. I think it is great that you are all interested in putting things in place for the reference of health professionals. However, I feel that it is up to women to take responsibility for the natural state of Childbirth.

[MelissafromSyd]

I think the point is that no-one can find any stats about FB at all :no: Women or health professionals. Or even female health professionals :) (the terms are not mutually exclusive!)

[AM]

I think that if women want statistics regarding FB, they'll find them. I think it is great that you are all interested in putting things in place for the reference of health professionals. However, I feel that it is up to women to take responsibility for the natural state of Childbirth.

Find them where? There are loads of anecdotal stories out there, but no reliable stats...Actually I'm thinking the numbers are so small anyway, they would be pretty useless statistically...

I'm not interested in putting them out there for health professionals, I just think info should be free for all to access it if they want to, I don't care who they are or what their slant is...Anyway, I can't see it happening anytime soon anyhow :)

[fai firinne]

The stats for freebirth will most likely fall under either planned homebirth or BBA - born before arrival.

Given that some people are of a disposition to persecute parents who freebirth, or people who support freebirth, you can understand that freebirthing parents are not going to be keen to share their statistics publically. They may also be mindful that certain authorities who seem to be keen supporters of freebirth and 'only want to know so they can help the cause', are in fact seeking a reason to 'prove' that freebirth is wrong/bad/dangerous and therefore they're 'on the side of the righteous' in going after freebirthers. No wonder freebirthing parents are cautious.

Laura Shanlan had freebirth stats on her side, so did Christian UC, and at Joyous Birth it's clear to see the number of safe freebirths versus those who had problems. Perhaps you could ask there.

The research shows that the rate of perinatal deaths at homebirths and low-risk hospital births (big questions in my mind about what is really 'low risk' given the incidence of iotrogenic problems plus the tendency to pathologise healthy women) are similar. However the incidence of damage to mothers is significantly less. So the research reveals.

I think we need a more holistic concept of 'safety'. Sure, mothers and babies not dying is the bottom line. But the long term well-being of mothers, babies and families is affected by a more holistic concept of what is safe birthing practice. We need a concept of safety that includes emotional, cultural & psychological as well as physical safety, not just a lack of mortality or morbidity, if we are going to get a clear understanding of what families need to birth safely and have continuing well-being afterwards.

Stats or no, we know enough to know that freebirth is not more risky that birth in a hospital. Depending on how you define safety. Safety for some people is defined as: 'no risk to my profit margins because my potential client base figure they can do without me.'

[kymmy]

I think we need a more holistic concept of 'safety'. Sure, mothers and babies not dying is the bottom line. But the long term well-being of mothers, babies and families is affected by a more holistic concept of what is safe birthing practice. We need a concept of safety that includes emotional, cultural & psychological as well as physical safety, not just a lack of mortality or morbidity, if we are going to get a clear understanding of what families need to birth safely and have continuing well-being afterwards.

Stats or no, we know enough to know that freebirth is not more risky that birth in a hospital. Depending on how you define safety. Safety for some people is defined as: 'no risk to my profit margins because my potential client base figure they can do without me.'


Exactly...wish more people understood that.

[BreithCuidiu]

But.. I wonder if any of these stats will provide proof that a freebirth has gone horribly wrong with a Doula present, as the OP is seeking?

Back to the question. Does anyone know of any poor outcome freebirths with a doula present (we can pretend that the OP is happy to hear from people who didn't have a Doua, but who are we kidding there?).

I'm interested now as to whether this information will be shared.

[MelissafromSyd]

BreithCuidiu, there was another thread that was started called "unassisted childbirth stats" - we spoke about this thread more aptly there I think.

The outcome was that we couldn't find any reliable stats - there were some stats that showed good outcomes but they were all voluntarily reported, so not really valid from a statistical POV. So no, there's no proof that a freebirth has gone horribly wrong with a doula present, but as it was pointed out (and not by me, you'll be pleased to know!), women are very unlikely to ever report doula-attended FB for fear of being reported to DOCS and authorities getting involved.

So in conclusion, we can't say that FB is safe with a doula as there are no reliable data to say that it is so. That's not to say it's not a choice for women, but we have a responsibility to promote that which we know to be safe, in my opinion.

[MilkOnTap]

women are very unlikely to ever report doula-attended FB for fear of being reported to DOCS and authorities getting involved.

What a sad country we live in when women's birthing choices are stripped away so badly that they are fearful of medwives and government bodies :(

This reminds me of a family who were 'running away' from the gov't because they chose not to jab their newborn with the hep B shot. One of the parents was Hep B positive and even with all the research that they had supporting their 'case' they still had to flee...

...yet we apparantly live in a free country.

[fai firinne]

So in conclusion, we can't say that FB is safe with a doula as there are no reliable data to say that it is so.

Who does the royal 'we' refer to?

We can't say that homebirth with a midwife is safe as there is no reliable data to say that it is so. Or that is what the AMA asserts, anyway.

We can't say that birth in a free-standing birth centre is safe, because there is no reliable data (and who determines what data is reliable, and how??) to say that is is so. Or that is what the AMA asserts, anyway, and it's enough to plant that seed of doubt in the mass consciousness.

(AMA being "American Medical Association - and the Australian version!)

We can't say that natural birth, or water birth, or VBAC is safe, because (according to the opponents of these choices), there is no "reliable" data (according to those who presume to judge what "reliable" is - another non-quantifiable, subject to personal bias entity there) to say that it is so.

We can't say that any kind of woman-centered birth in which the power, control and responsibility is the woman's, is safe, because you can't control and quantify these things, that is what bugs people who are threatened by women's power and responsibility and who seek to control birth.

The stats and stories that do exist about homebirth, natural birth and freebirth overwhelmingly indicate that these are intelligent and reasonable options for women. They do NOT provide evidence to support a conclusion that these options are not safe. Opponents of these options for women, which render women as less pliable and docile patients, will not like that there is non-quantifiable "proof". But can they prove otherwise? Can they "proove" that woman-centered birth is NOT safe???

????

Stats versus Stories: we live in a culture that honours masculine ways of knowing over feminine ways of knowing. (Google that - wise people than me have written much on this topic.) The telling of stories - what is referred to dismissively as 'anecdotal' is an important method of the feminine ways of sharing, gathering and ordering knowledge and wisdom. We need a mututally-honoring balance of both the masculine and the feminine, in all aspects of life, for optimal health, safety and well-being. If there is an imbalance, in which one lords it over the other, there will be illness instead of well-being. We see this a lot, in some societies more than others. An imbalance of the masculine over the feminine in society leads to manifestations of misogyny in ways subtle and overt, that negatively impacts the well-being and potential of both men and women. Birth is a key area in which it is critical that the wisdom of the masculine is not allowed to be dominant (more revered and valid) over the wisdom of the feminine. It's essential that the proper mutually-inclusive balance is reached for safe birthing. That means, the voice of the feminine must be heard and counted as valid. That is why anecdotal stories matter so much when it comes to safe birthing practice. You can't just rely on stats, or honour stats over women's voices and women's stories. You need a balance of both perspectives. Beware when one dismisses the other. Watch for the one that respects and counts the other as valid.

[MelissafromSyd]

The royal 'we' can refer to whomever you would like it to refer to.

There was a large Canadian study on midwife-assisted homebirth which proved it to be safe. There was a large Australian study on birth centre births which proved them to be safe. There was a smaller study (Australian) on midwife-assisted homebirth - again, great safety records.

The AMA (Aust) can assert whatever they like - perhaps they only look at some research and not others, but the research on midwife assisted birth (BC or home) is out there. Home birth (publicly-funded) is offered in WA, SA and NSW - not sure about the other states - this is after pilot studies and on-going QA studies to determine "safety" - whatever you want to call that.

We can compare risks with VBAC against risks of ERCS as there is data on all of this.


The stats and stories that do exist about homebirth, natural birth and freebirth overwhelmingly indicate that these are intelligent and reasonable options for women.

Yet none of us have been able to find stats around FB. That's not to say it's not an option - just that there's nothing to say it's as safe as other birthing options. It could well be, but we don't know yet, so it's a belief or a hypothesis, but it's not fact.

Moving along ....

I really liked what you said about anecdotal stories and masculine and feminine ways of knowing and this has formed a major theme in my degrees. For many many years, anecdotal stories were handed down generation to generation, and thus a body of knowledge was born. I appreciate the value of this (except that much of the knowledge was lost :hissy:)

The only issue with anecdotal stories and subjectivity is that it's so hard to measure (masculine, I know) and therefore compare, contrast, improve etc. There's also the argument that research of such a nature will never get into respected journals with a wide readership precisely because it's not facts and figures - I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this. In the move to professionalise midwifey, a common theme is around making the research more quantifiable so that it becomes more accessible to a wider community - this gives it credibility. Is it about the means or the end? Are we our own worst enemies?What are your thoughts?

Anyway, I think I've taken this way off topic .... I was just really interested to read the last part of your post.

[BreithCuidiu]

Anyway, I think I've taken this way off topic .... I was just really interested to read the last part of your post.

Yes. The topic is about whether any mothers or babies have died, or been injured, as a result of a Doula attending their birth.

Back to that.

[kymmy]

As a result of a doula being present?

[BreithCuidiu]

As a result of a doula being present?

In place of a Midwife, I believe the OP is referring to.

[BreithCuidiu]

So in conclusion, we can't say that FB is safe with a doula as there are no reliable data to say that it is so. That's not to say it's not a choice for women, but we have a responsibility to promote that which we know to be safe, in my opinion.



So, are you saying that FB is safer without a Doula? If so, why?

[AM]

Hang on for a second here. This is the OP.


Does anyone know of any planned homebirths that have happened without registered midwives present where the mother or baby had complications or were harmed? Just interested to know if anyone has had any experiences or knows of anyone who has.


The word doula is not mentioned at all, and in freebirth stats, the presence or absence of a doula would certainly not be noted, as they are non-medical support anyway.

The care provider in a 'homebirth without a mw' is the mother herself, or perhaps a joint venture between her and her partner, if that's the way she wants it. (As opposed to being a joint thing between mw and mother or mw and couple if a mw is present, or the mw being a professional medical consultant)

[BreithCuidiu]

Just to clarify, I'm interested in knowing if you are aware of any planned homebirths without a registered midwife (freebirth with or without a doula), where the mother or baby had complications or were harmed?

Okay I meant this one then.

[AM]

OK fair enough, I just started to get the feeling this thread was turning into a bit of a turf war (not really the right description, but the best I can come up with right now!) between mw's and doulas, and felt like saying "HELLO....:wave: Birthing woman here...I'M in charge!" ;)

[MelissafromSyd]

Okay I meant this one then.


Originally Posted by MelissafromSyd http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/showthread.php?p=3113010#post3113010)
Just to clarify, I'm interested in knowing if you are aware of any planned homebirths without a registered midwife (freebirth with or without a doula), where the mother or baby had complications or were harmed?

To clarify it again - the question was about freebirth - ie, a homebirth without a midwife, and with or without a doula. The doula's presence or absense was not what i was asking about - it was more about the absense of a midwife (or dr, but since most likely no doctors attend HBs, I didn't feel a need to include them).

[BreithCuidiu]

"HELLO....:wave: Birthing woman here...I'M in charge!" ;)

That you are! :yes: And you can choose whomever you would like to be present and to hold your space.

[PunkyDiva]

I've resonded several times to fill out surveys for stats etc on outcome of my freebirth but no one gets back to me. :confused: I've just been assuming they wanna have good outcomes only so they?? can substantiate freebirth as "safe".

I am under no illusion that it will only take one freebirth death and we will go the same way as UK, where even a hint of choice to freebirth is a criminal offence.

[AM]

Punky, are you SURE it is illegal in the UK?

I've just been looking it up, and it does sound a little more strict then here, but still far from illegal...

This comment from Laura Shanley, author of "Unassisted Birth" (she's American, but pretty much spearheaded the UC movement, and is very high profile)


Actually, as Beverley Beech, chairwoman of the Association for Improvements in Maternity Services (UK) pointed out in the program, unassisted childbirth/freebirth is NOT illegal in the UK. To quote her directly, "Anyone that says it's illegal is either lying, misinformed or ignorant." What's illegal is for someone to pretend to be a midwife when they're not. October 26 2008





www.homebirth.org.uk/law.htm

Birth Without Midwives

It is perfectly legal to give birth alone, unassisted - ie with no midwife in attendance - whether this was accidental, or deliberate. Some women choose this option because they cannot get the sort of non-intrusive, supportive midwifery care they require. For others, giving birth unassisted is a positive choice which they believe to be best for them and their babies. I do not wish to either promote or condemn planned unassisted birth; the aim of this section is simply to inform. For links to sites advocating unassisted birth, see [6] below.

It is illegal for anyone other than a UK registered midwife or doctor to 'attend' a woman in labour except in an emergency. This means that if it can be proved that the birth partner intended to act as a midwife, he (or she, but 'he' is used here for simplicity) may be prosecuted. The birth partner may even be liable to prosecution if he was present at the baby's birth, even if he was in another room at the time. Some have suggested that 'present' means in the same room, but it could be interpreted as 'nearby'.

In the one case in recent years where such a prosecution has been successful, the baby's father, Brian Radley, had stated explicitly to the health authorities that he intended to act as a midwife for the birth, and this statement of intent helped the prosecution's case. His wife was told by the health authority that, if she called a midwife, the midwife would arrive and immediately call an ambulance to take her to hospital. Mrs Radley had vowed never to enter the hospital again after she received poor treatment during there when having her first baby. Given the health authority's unsupportive attitude, the Radleys felt that conducting the birth themselves was their best option. Brian Radley was fined £500, but his fine was paid by a doctor who was appalled at the way this couple had been treated by the medical profession. [7]

The threat of planning an unassisted home birth is sometimes used by mothers bargaining with unhelpful authorities. Booking a home birth can turn into a game of nerves, with the health authority insisting that it will not send a midwife. If the mother calls while in labour and states that she will not (or cannot) go into hospital, and requests a midwife, they would almost certainly send a midwife if the mother stood her ground. To date, as far as I have been able to ascertain, there have not been any cases where a midwife was not sent when the mother requested one in this situation. However, few women want to engage in this sort of debate while in labour.

Consider the situation where a mother called while in labour and refused to go into hospital, but the health authority did not send a midwife, and the mother gave birth alone. If the baby or mother suffered harm as a result, then the health authority could presumably be sued for failing to provide the expected level of care. However, it could also be argued that there was contributory negligence from the mother, since it was reasonably forseeable that harm might occur if she gave birth without medical supervision. This would reduce any liability of the health authority. So, while health authorities should bear in mind that they might be vulnerable to negligence claims if they failed to send a midwife, there are limitations on the likely extent of their liability.