**distressing** inquest into two newborn deaths, delivered by same midwife

[monnie24]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/home-births-under-the-microscope/story-e6frea83-1226122889390

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-26/home-birth-deaths-coroner/2857418/?site=adelaide

RIP little girl, i have been following this closely as it happened in my home town. I feel so sorry for the little bubba, and student midwife. They didnt even want the baby to be taken when the ambulance arrived when problems came up, i hope an outcome comes out very soon!

[Lillynix]

I've seen the stories before, I feel for the poor families, both they and the Midwife have my full support.

From my perspective, the Midwife was doing what she is supposed to do, supporting women in their informed choice, to birth where and how they want to.

[Lateralus]

how horribly tragic for everyone involved :(

[mrsdj1234]

It is terribly sad that these mothers ended up with empty arms.

I do find it interesting though thinking if there would be so much media scrutiny if these had been hospital births.
Sadly stories like this are making it neigh on impossible for mothers to make their own informed choices regarding their births.

[sweetseven]

I am very concerned about the statement "Ms Kereru asked the Deputy Coroner also to consider wider issues regarding home births and whether such procedures overseen by private midwives should be more strictly regulated."

[monnie24]

I do believe the midwife would be investigated if it happened in a hospital.

I'm sorry but I cannot get my head around any mother wanting to go home empty handed? Wouldn't you want her to interfere quicker etc and make your birth safer etc! Isn't that the whole idea of home birthing staying home unless complications arise? not staying home until a baby dies!

[Jakois]

I do believe the midwife would be investigated if it happened in a hospital.

I'm sorry but I cannot get my head around any mother wanting to go home empty handed? Wouldn't you want her to interfere quicker etc and make your birth safer etc! Isn't that the whole idea of home birthing staying home unless complications arise? not staying home until a baby dies!

I can't see that it says in either of those articles that the Midwife did not intervene at the appropriate time.

[monnie24]

Sorry I have been watching on the news too. What I meant by intervene is by calling Ambo quicker etc apparently they told them not to help etc and she thought that was extremely strange. That was on the news last night.

[second baby not so easy]

A little girls' life was lost, so yes I think it should be investigated! If a baby died in hospital it would have been investigated so should any births.

I agree, women should have the right to birth what ever way they want, but the childs welfare should also be a priority.

[Jakois]

A little girls' life was lost, so yes I think it should be investigated! If a baby died in hospital it would have been investigated so should any births.

I agree, women should have the right to birth what ever way they want, but the childs welfare should also be a priority.

Yes it should be investigated.

Would it have attracted so much media attention if it were a hospital birth? No it wouldn't. Babies regularly die in hospitals without the nation ever hearing their name, but if a birth goes wrong in a home environment, then of course its a HUGE story.

I would be hesitant to rely solely on media reports for accurate details in relation to these tragedies.

[second baby not so easy]

Yes it should be investigated.

Would it have attracted so much media attention if it were a hospital birth? No it wouldn't. Babies regularly die in hospitals without the nation ever hearing their name, but if a birth goes wrong in a home environment, then of course its a HUGE story.

I would be hesitant to rely solely on media reports for accurate details in relation to these tragedies.

No it probably would not have cause so much media attention compared to deaths in a hospital and the details can be left out etc . But at the end of the day 2 babies have died and there should be an investigation and for the midwife to challenge an investigation by the coroner as "Legal precedent holds a child is only a person, with rights, when born alive.
Ms Barrett argued common law ruled a heartbeat, pulse and respiration were the only true signs of life."


Issues like this put a really bad light on home births, which make it even harder for women to birth the way they choose.

[DaughteroftheForest]

I also live in Adelaide and have been aware of this case for quite sometime, as the Midwife in question has attended the births of many close friends of mine.

I think it's quite telling that the family involved support Lisa 100% and do not blame her at all for what happened to their baby.

I wouldn't hesitate to use her as my midwife if I needed an IM to Home birth. Luckily enough I qualify for a home birth through the hospital system.

The fact of the matter is, sometimes babies just die. She did everything she could to bring that little girl into the world alive. And people who are questioning this should read the coroners report instead of basing their opinions on the information supplied by the media.

[Annabella]

I agree daughter of the forest. The families involved support her 100%. They were there, they know what happened and how hard she tried to save the baby, they were the ones that tragically lost their daughters.

Although I believe an inquest is probably appropriate under the circumstances, as others have said, it worries me that it will quite likely be used to basically determine homebirth laws in our country. I also believe Lisa is within her rights to challenge the decision to have an inquest because both babies were stillborn, and in most cases there is no inquest into stillbirths. The parents also did not want an inquest, which says a lot. (As I said, I thunk it was probably appropriate although I feel it's a bit of a witch hunt).

There are many deaths in hospital too, and they never get the media coverage this case has. I read in inquest into the deaths of two babies who died very soon after birth as a result of the same obstetrician's actions. I'd never heard of it til I read the inquest so it obviously didn't get the same coverage this case has :(

[TurnedBatty]

I only just heard about this the other day :( The fact is it can create precedent for homebirth and hospital birth with the pulse activity the ambos found. I heard, so I may be wrong, but that that activity is not enough to even make a heart beat, let alone the fact the baby had never taken a breathe outside the womb, yet was deemed alive. I'm not surprised the midwife fought them on that one.

It's just so horribly sad, and there is no way this would even get a mention in a hospital setting.

[InBetween]

I do find it interesting though thinking if there would be so much media scrutiny if these had been hospital births.

Not really. This story has media interest because it's now subject to a coronial inquiry that could result in Ms Barrett being criminally charged. In addition, her role as 'birth advocate' is also being investigated as if she's found to be performing midwifery duties while unregistered well that does not bode well for her either. Either way, this is not an avenue by which to judge the competency of Ms Barrett but to simply acknowledge that this is a very, very serious matter which isn't just a home birth issue and unfortunately the media haven't gotten the entire picture out there for the public to read.

Like others have said, I await with interest the coroner's report on the matter.

[elleandsam]

This is a really intense issue. Unfortunately not all babies will survive birth, it sucks but it's true. Women will have miscarriages, stillbirths, and neonatal deaths. Does this mean that all births should happen in hospital? Absolutely not. A vast majority of births have a happy ending, and for a majority of women, birthing at home is safe.

[brogeybear]

Inquests should only be held when there has been a *death*. The coroner has actually changed the meaning of "life" legally in deciding to proceed to inquest. What people fail to realise is that this has far reaching implications, think for instance of organ donation as one example, which requires the donor to still have electrical pulses.
Stillbirths should not proceed to inquest. It's a tragic fact that babies die every day in hospitals, and yet it's accepted as part of life there.
This (and other cases like it) is nothing more than a modern day witch hunt. It's disgraceful. The coroner should be ashamed of himself for using his position in such a way. The media should be ashamed of themselves for misrepresenting facts. And the general public should be ashamed for closing their eyes to the reality of the situation simply because they falsely assume it doesn't effect them.

[Etienne]

I would suggest anyone wanting to judge should research this further. I am one who fell for the media reports at first glance and have since changed my mind reading the real story of what happened.

My heart goes out to the family.

[InBetween]

Brogey, the deaths were not ruled as stillbirths.
As a result, a Coroner's Inquest was ruled as being necessary.
I can appreciate why supporters of Ms Barrett would be upset.
And I can see why people would jump to many conclusions as to what this case may actually be about and make their judgements accordingly.
But I'm ambivalent about that. I'm interested as to how this will all turn out, what the ramifications will be and whether any precedents will be set. More importantly, I support the right of the public to know what really happened.

For those who have only read media reports, earlier rulings made by the Supreme Court and the Coroner in this matter are available online.

[missie_mack]

Brogey, the deaths were not ruled as stillbirths.
As a result, a Coroner's Inquest was ruled as being necessary.
I can appreciate why supporters of Ms Barrett would be upset.
And I can see why people would jump to many conclusions as to what this case may actually be about and make their judgements accordingly.
But I'm ambivalent about that. I'm interested as to how this will all turn out, what the ramifications will be and whether any precedents will be set. More importantly, I support the right of the public to know what really happened.

For those who have only read media reports, earlier rulings made by the Supreme Court and the Coroner in this matter are available online.

Shoulder dystocia isn't an uncommon situation in hospitals and sadly in hospitals babies still die. Hell, there was even media articles about OB/GYNs now being trained to break collarbones because they think it is so prevelant.
If you don't think it is personal, research how many OBs and hospital midwives have been brought before the courts for babies lost in hospitals.

[brogeybear]

I know IB, the coroner changed the legal definition of "life" in his ruling, hence permitting the inquest. Fact is, the babes were stillborn, there were merely electrical pulses detected (after being worked on it's not really a suprise).

I support the truth! I don't support political agendas.

[elleandsam]

I know IB, the coroner changed the legal definition of "life" in his ruling, hence permitting the inquest. Fact is, the babes were stillborn, there were merely electrical pulses detected (after being worked on it's not really a suprise).

I support the truth! I don't support political agendas.

:iagree: :yelclap:

[ourbradybunch]

I'm probably gonna get bad responses to this BUT I had a baby with shoulder dystocia & that was very traumatic for both me, bub & the midwife.
5 yrs later when I had my youngest by chance I got her when I booked into the hospital, a quick read of my history brought it all back to her & she told me no way would she deliver another baby of mine.
I think a home birth is a bad idea as stuff does happen and it happens quick!

[mrsdj1234]

What I find surprising, is that neither group of parents hold Lisa responsible.
Wouldn't most parents who lost a child prosecute the person responsible, if there was one? I know I would. I certainly wouldn't support them.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[SassyMummy]

I think a home birth is a bad idea as stuff does happen and it happens quick!

That's a perfectly valid opinion to have about your own birth - so don't have one. Plenty of us see more risk in having a hospital birth... there are heaps of risks involved with intervention, and to many of us, these risks are worse than the potential risks of birthing away from a hospital.


What I find surprising, is that neither group of parents hold Lisa responsible.
Wouldn't most parents who lost a child prosecute the person responsible, if there was one? I know I would. I certainly wouldn't support them.


Perhaps these women understand some things are not really the fault of anyone in particular - they just happen. MAYBE if the mothers were in hospital it wouldn't happen - but deaths still occur in hospitals, and I'm sure they udnerstand that. Perhaps they realise that everyone did all that they could in those situations, so they're not blaming anyone...

[mrsdj1234]

Just to clarify my earlier comment, what I meant was that I don't understand how the coroner can try and hold Lisa responsible for these deaths, when the parents don't hold her responsible. Surely if Lisa had done something wrong then the parents would not be supporting her.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[Gandalf]

Just to clarify my earlier comment, what I meant was that I don't understand how the coroner can try and hold Lisa responsible for these deaths, when the parents don't hold her responsible. Surely if Lisa had done something wrong then the parents would not be supporting her.
Yup, you would think so, right? :(:no:

This case makes me so mad. If i had thought before now they were trying to figure out the proof, It defniitely doesn't feel like that anymore after the latest piece in the news.

[InBetween]

Fact is, the babes were stillborn, there were merely electrical pulses detected (after being worked on it's not really a suprise).

This is not held to be a fact. This is your opinion and to which you are entitled. But let's not confuse the two.

It's irrelevant whether the parents of the deceased children support Ms Barrett or not. This decision to have an inquest or not is not theirs to make nor should be left to them.

The point here is that these deaths are being treated as suspicious and an investigation is under way. With some of the comments I'm reading in here you'd think that Ms Barrett is assumed to be guilty. This isn't what is happening. What is happening is that she's being held accountable as any other professional would in her situation. And yes, plenty of medical staff are brought before a court for medical negligence and many are successfully sued and/or deregistered. This is why they have insurance. Not every case gets an inquest but that doesn't mean deaths in hospital aren't investigated. Just because you don't hear of them on the news doesn't mean they don't happen. So to state otherwise is just simply not true.

I'm a bit concerned that the only political agenda I'm seeing more of in here at present is one that elevates the homebirth movement to a holier than thou status. While I support the right to birth at home I also support the responsibility of we as a society to make sure that such an endeavour remains safe.

Has anyone stopped to read the guidelines that the College of Midwifery is pushing through?

[delirium]

It always amazes me how babies die in hospital births every day and people chalk it up as sometimes babies just die... which is true. Well it couldn't possibly have been the ob's fault, bc they are professionals. But if a baby dies at home, then it MUST be a negligent IM and mother.

Birth is dangerous, it is what it is. That's not to detract from the family's sorrow (or anyone that loses a child). Studies all around the world show HB is safer in low risk pgs that hospitals. Were these births low risk? I don't know. Personally I think there is an agenda in this to discredit HB. Electrical pulses can still be there after death. It sounds like still birth to me, a terrible sad thing, but not negligence. If this happened in a hospital there would be not even a mention of neglience.

[InBetween]

Wow. It amazes me how flippantly you describe what you think occurs in the event of a hospital death and that you could be so dismissive of it. They are never 'chalked up' and certainly not in the callous way you have described. I've listened to many a tearful call at 3am from people who have been present at such events and it makes me really angry that there are those who are attempting to desensitise whom they see as "the other side" in what they think is a lynching of homebirth advocates.

There is a much bigger picture here.

As has been stated before, no one is disputing a death. What is being disputed is whether they were born dead or alive and the situations that led to this outcome.


Were these births low risk?

According to earlier reports available in the public domain (High Court and Coroner's) no, they were high risk births and the mothers were well aware of the risks posed by homebirth.

Ms Barrett has been involved with more than these two cases which have resulted in a death, the most recent one being last week.

If Ms Barrett is found not to be negligent then I'll celebrate with the rest of you. This case is very interesting to me on many levels. However, in light of the facts that have been established in Court, I do believe an investigation is warranted and I'm a bit perplexed why there's not more people saying the same thing.

Hmm.

[delirium]

Wow. I'm surprised you could be so dismissive of a hospital death. They are never chalked up nor in the callous way you have described.



I'm not being dismissive of hospital deaths at all, in fact quite the opposite. What I'm saying is that the media never reports on a still birth/death in a hospital. I believe society automatically believe that a hospital death must have been an unavoidable one bc 'real' professionals are involved.

I think there is, and always has been a media slant on birth. The AMA has a vested interest in debunking HB. They are losing money and the power over women. I also think high risk can be subjective. I have breech babies - seen as high risk and therefore have c/s. I don't think breech is high risk at all, it's that professionals have stopped being trained in these births. It would be like putting a 5 year old behind the wheel of a car, then saying that is proof that driving a car is extremely dangerous. JMHO of course...

[InBetween]

You're veering off on a tangent.

This is about an inquest into the deaths of children that have been deemed suspicious.

The media don't report homebirth deaths either. I know this because I know of two people in my life who have suffered this tragedy. It was not splashed on the front page of the newspaper nor were the midwives called into question.
Nor do I expect them to be.

A few years ago I was privy to a case where a midwife was deregistered due to her negligence at a homebirth and no, this did not appear in the paper either.

A breech birth is high risk. Even midwives will tell you this. That you have made this statement illustrates how very little you know about this subject. One of the underlying issues here is whether high risk births should be permitted to be performed at home and this is something that the College of Midwifery is also addressing.

Oh Coroner hurry up with that finding! *lol*

[The sooper nanny]

I have very strong views about this midwife. I know quite a fair bit more about recent events she was involved in that had more tragic outcomes.
She has failed in her duty as a midwife to do no harm. The risks she takes are going to continually lead to more infants deaths- there is a reason she is no longer practicing as a midwife. It will be interesting to see what the outcome of these cases are. As technically she cannot be charged as a midwife, she is no longer registered
Whilst I support homebirth, I do not support her blatant disregard for risks and the loss of the lives of these precious babies


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[SpecialPatrolGroup]

I am interested in how many people seem to be saying *the babies were never alive so there can't be a death* or things of that nature - it strikes me that there are lots if agendas attached to this and a couple of little babies who *may* have been born alive seem to be written off as collateral damage in the battle for home births. This, to me, is a travesty; let their loss be investigated because there is nothing to fear in the truth.

Ok, that's my thoughts, let the cyber lynching begin...

Sent from my HTC Desire using Bubhub

[The sooper nanny]

I am interested in how many people seem to be saying *the babies were never alive so there can't be a death* or things of that nature - it strikes me that there are lots if agendas attached to this and a couple of little babies who *may* have been born alive seem to be written off as collateral damage in the battle for home births. This, to me, is a travesty; let their loss be investigated because there is nothing to fear in the truth.

Ok, that's my thoughts, let the cyber lynching begin...

Sent from my HTC Desire using Bubhub

I absolutely agree with you.


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[brogeybear]

What this true midwife does, is support and uphold a woman's right to choose what she does with her body, where and how she births her babies. It is the woman's choice. Noone elses. The woman has the right to choose, this is what is under threat. And before anyone cries foul about the rights of the babies, seriously, do you really think that anyone has a more vested interest in the safety and wellbeing of the babies than the mothers themselves! Get over yourselves!

So long as a woman is informed, and I mean truly informed, as to the risks and benefits associated with her choice, what right does anyone have to rid her of that option. Lisa is a true midwife, because she is "with woman". Even if it is not something she would personally choose, she supports the woman's right to choose for herself! She is also extremely experienced and knowlegable.

The loss of any babe is a tragedy in my opinion. The loss of these babes is no more tragic than any other though. What is a travesty is that the loss of these babes is being disrespected and turned into a political and media circus. That is dispicable!

[The sooper nanny]

What this true midwife does, is support and uphold a woman's right to choose what she does with her body, where and how she births her babies. It is the woman's choice. Noone elses. The woman has the right to choose, this is what is under threat. And before anyone cries foul about the rights of the babies, seriously, do you really think that anyone has a more vested interest in the safety and wellbeing of the babies than the mothers themselves! Get over yourselves!

So long as a woman is informed, and I mean truly informed, as to the risks and benefits associated with her choice, what right does anyone have to rid her of that option. Lisa is a true midwife, because she is "with woman". Even if it is not something she would personally choose, she supports the woman's right to choose for herself! She is also extremely experienced and knowlegable.

The loss of any babe is a tragedy in my opinion. The loss of these babes is no more tragic than any other though. What is a travesty is that the loss of these babes is being disrespected and turned into a political and media circus. That is dispicable!

The loss of these babies is a tragedy as they could have been prevented. How many deaths are an acceptable amount before the red flags start going up
She has failed in her duty of care. Simple, not acceptable


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[DaddyLarge]

I'm having trouble understanding how holding a coronial inquest into the deaths of two people is an attack on the freedom of women. Let the facts come to light, and let the chips fall where they may.

That someone would fight so hard to stop a coronial inquest is very curious, though.

[Bubbles10]

A breech birth is high risk. Even midwives will tell you this. That you have made this statement illustrates how very little you know about this subject. One of the underlying issues here is whether high risk births should be permitted to be performed at home and this is something that the College of Midwifery is also addressing.



Do you agree with the latest release by the ACM? I think it was a very scary piece and many of their recommendations are not supported by many women or midwives. (or evidence based medicine)

[delirium]

You're veering off on a tangent.

No I'm not. You have said these babies births were considered high risk. I said that's subjective and gave an example of breech.


A breech birth is high risk. Even midwives will tell you this. That you have made this statement illustrates how very little you know about this subject.

lol thank you for putting me in my place. Actually I know a great deal about breech birth, I have had 2 breeches. The term breech trial was a sham, the paper that defined breech as dangerous. It has debunked by several peer reviewed papers as having flaws in methodology. The paper showed a rise in morality and morbidity.. but the key here is that these births were performed by workers untrained in breech birth. When you get a professional who has experience, it's in fact no more dangerous that a vertex birth. Thus my example of putting a 5 year old, unlearned child in the driver's seat and saying that proves driving on the road it too dangerous and should be banned.

If you stand against HB, that is entirely your perogative. But please don't patronise me and tell me what I can and can't discuss....

[delirium]

I'm having trouble understanding how holding a coronial inquest into the deaths of two people is an attack on the freedom of women. Let the facts come to light, and let the chips fall where they may.

That someone would fight so hard to stop a coronial inquest is very curious, though.

I'll only speak for me here, but the inquest isn't my issue. IM's can be negligent like any professionsal. My issue is that HB is always so much more under the microscope, imo the AMA has a great deal to do with this. It is prurely my opinion, but they have made it very clear they want HB gone, and not for valid reasons but for their own selfish interests.

[lambjam]

I am interested in how many people seem to be saying *the babies were never alive so there can't be a death* or things of that nature - it strikes me that there are lots if agendas attached to this and a couple of little babies who *may* have been born alive seem to be written off as collateral damage in the battle for home births. This, to me, is a travesty; let their loss be investigated because there is nothing to fear in the truth.

Ok, that's my thoughts, let the cyber lynching begin...

^^This^^

[The sooper nanny]

Let's see what the coroner decides... There will be more inquests to come.
Her website is called midwife mutinity have a look and see what you think.
Yes, she supports women's choices but when that woman's choice is to accept that her baby is at risk of death, it is the midwives responsibility to stand back and say I'm not taking that risk. There is a place for hospital birth. Preterms breech and twins are on her website and some of the stuff she does makes me so angry.
Negligent



Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[elleandsam]

But what happened to bodily autonomy? I'm high risk now because of previous surgery, so should I only be allowed to birth where a doctor says I can because of said risk? I would spend all my energy fighting continuous fetal monitoring, canullas and birthing on my back instead of focusing on, you know, birthing a baby.

Hospitals can claim to be VBAC friendly but when it comes down to it they're too focused on the what ifs of birth to truly allow a normal, natural birth happen.

Now a csection saved my life, and my babies, I'm not denying that, but if I were to birth again and I didn't have placenta previa, my chances of having. VBAC in hospital are pitifully low.

[The sooper nanny]

VBAC is one thing but preterm water births and many hours between twin births?? How can a midwife accept that these would be a satisfactory candidate for home births??
How can she accept that risk without recognising that babies are going to die?? She has failed in her duty of care. How many infant deaths do you think are acceptable for one "professional" to be responsible for??
One is bad enough but when time and time again babies are dying in her care, something is grossly wrong

Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[Guest]

I think every babies death should be investigated no matter where or how.
I think the point is The sooper nanny is 'high risk' births can also go wrong in a hospital, dr's don't hold more power because they're holding a scalpel. When you homebirth, you research the facts and accept the risks. if those babies died in hospital, do you really think it would have been different for the parents? If so how? And how did the midwife not do as much as she could if a dr was faced with the same set of circumstances?
I also believe that a single dr can have infant deaths on their books too, but they can continue to practice because they're protected by the ama, that because they're dr's they did everything they could. ??
Its an interesting debate to be had becuase it's the question, is homebirth safer than a hospital birth? And if so how? Hospital equipment would mean there ouwld be no infant deaths and there are, birth with an ob would mean there'd be no infant deaths and there are.

[The sooper nanny]

Let's see what the inquest shows.



Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[elleandsam]

But what about the births that haven't gone wrong and have had a perfect outcome and wouldn't have happened if they hadn't been in hospital. Let's face it, hospitals have time limits, not all women dilate at the same rate, not all women push for the same amount of time, some women have labours that stop and start, some women have irregular contractions... But because they don't form to what is considered normal birth they are induced or sectioned, and they think their body is faulty when if they were just left to birth they probably avoided surgery or induction all together.

Women should always have the right to choose where they birth and should always have access to the care giver of their choice, even if they're high risk. Birth is a risk. Pregnancy is a risk, that doesn't mean a woman should give over all her rights to bodily autonomy.

[elleandsam]

They've changed the definition of life for this and another high profile case, I cannot believe the number of people who think this is just about home birth. Changing the definition of life could have sure consequences regarding abortion, organ donation, decisions regarding life support...

[The sooper nanny]

But what about the births that haven't gone wrong and have had a perfect outcome and wouldn't have happened if they hadn't been in hospital. Let's face it, hospitals have time limits, not all women dilate at the same rate, not all women push for the same amount of time, some women have labours that stop and start, some women have irregular contractions... But because they don't form to what is considered normal birth they are induced or sectioned, and they think their body is faulty when if they were just left to birth they probably avoided surgery or induction all together.

Women should always have the right to choose where they birth and should always have access to the care giver of their choice, even if they're high risk. Birth is a risk. Pregnancy is a risk, that doesn't mean a woman should give over all her rights to bodily autonomy.

To me this isn't about homebirth
I want this woman to stop practicing
As more babies are going to die
It wouldnt matter WHERE these births took place
She is actually not doing IMs any favours as people think it's the homebirths that put these babies at risk. No, it was poor management and negligence


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[Hokey Pokey]

I'm probably gonna get bad responses to this BUT I had a baby with shoulder dystocia & that was very traumatic for both me, bub & the midwife.
5 yrs later when I had my youngest by chance I got her when I booked into the hospital, a quick read of my history brought it all back to her & she told me no way would she deliver another baby of mine.
I think a home birth is a bad idea as stuff does happen and it happens quick!

I had one too and my baby was born not breathing and no pulse.. 15 months later I delivered another baby but no problems with the shoulders.

[elleandsam]

To me this isn't about homebirth
I want this woman to stop practicing
As more babies are going to die
It wouldnt matter WHERE these births took place
She is actually not doing IMs any favours as people think it's the homebirths that put these babies at risk. No, it was poor management and negligence


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

But you don't think with current campaign against Homebirth that this case if found guilty won't be used a a precedent against 'high risk' Homebirth. Then what? Women go underground and freebirth. What if something happens to their baby? Oh wait, that's already happened and is also being used to set a precedent.

It's a slippery slope. I think birthing at home will be illegal within 5 years unless something changes and women see how flawed our current system is.

[Hokey Pokey]

But what happened to bodily autonomy? I'm high risk now because of previous surgery, so should I only be allowed to birth where a doctor says I can because of said risk? I would spend all my energy fighting continuous fetal monitoring, canullas and birthing on my back instead of focusing on, you know, birthing a baby.

Hospitals can claim to be VBAC friendly but when it comes down to it they're too focused on the what ifs of birth to truly allow a normal, natural birth happen.

Now a csection saved my life, and my babies, I'm not denying that, but if I were to birth again and I didn't have placenta previa, my chances of having. VBAC in hospital are pitifully low.


I don't think your chances of a vbac are low at all, because you had placenta praevia. I had this condition with my second and went on to have a vbac with # 3 and # 4 (even despite the shoulder dystocia with #3 the hospital never told me I could not vbac with #4.) You would be finding it harder if say your reason for a csection was due to the shape/size of your pelviz or something like that. If your placenta is clear from the cervix next time you have a good chance of a vbac. :hugs:

[elleandsam]

I don't think your chances of a vbac are low at all, because you had placenta praevia. I had this condition with my second and went on to have a vbac with # 3 and # 4 (even despite the shoulder dystocia with #3 the hospital never told me I could not vbac with #4.) You would be finding it harder if say your reason for a csection was due to the shape/size of your pelviz or something like that. If your placenta is clear from the cervix next time you have a good chance of a vbac. :hugs:



I think it depends on your hospital, some are okay but others are pretty bad. Many times I've heard of VBACers being told they require CFM, cannula on admission, cannot go post dates. Seeing as I would refuse a 12 week scan, GTT and most likely the morphology scan, I would want to birth in water and be lotus birthing, I really can't see how a hospital birth would fit for me.

[DailyDiversion]

They've changed the definition of life for this and another high profile case, I cannot believe the number of people who think this is just about home birth. Changing the definition of life could have sure consequences regarding abortion, organ donation, decisions regarding life support...

Sorry, but this statment is not legally correct. Though it was argued by Ms. Barrett's legal representatives that the Coroner had extended the definition of what it means to be "born alive", that argument was rejected by the High Court when it refused the special leave application to appeal the original decision to hold an inquest.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-06-10/midwife-fails-to-stop-home-birth-death-inquest/2754030

[hopefully2]

I don't understand how people put birth plan over safe sensible birthing choices. Who cares if there are canullas etc, if your doctor recommends a hospital birth then he wants to eliminate the worst possible fate. Too many people focus on 'natural' rather than safe delivery. I don't agree the woman should have a choice if there is risk to self or baby. I personally would never place my wants for delivery over the safe arrival of my children. I have worked so hard to get them. And before you all start arguing with me, people do have closed minds and decide this is how it will be no other way. I was at my fs office and he was on the phone to another ob and he was saying that Friggin woman wouldnt listen to me we nearly lost them both. He was so Friggin shaken and angry.

[InBetween]

I gave birth to a child. That doesn't mean I know everything about childbirth. :)


It is the woman's choice. Noone elses.

I do not subscribe to this statement in its absolute form. I believe that under certain circumstances where intervention has occurred, I think that it has been warranted. One example I can give was that when I was in the post natal ward the Police were called to assist staff in reinstating a child that had been taken from NICU by the child's mother and was on her way home. She was adamant that her premature and now dying child was well enough to go home. Should she have been allowed to go? Should her choices have been honoured? What of the child?

And then you have comments made by people who say they should've been allowed to birth at home but admit that medical intervention saved both their life and that of their baby's. This is fence sitting.

What a lot of women seem to forget is that they have another person to consider, someone that does not 'belong' to them but someone they are responsible for. And if you are told that you have a high risk birth and you choose to toss that knowledge aside and put that child in danger and 'the village' wants to make sure you have that child safely then I'm all for it. I find it unconscionable that there's so much emphasis on 'freedom' and nothing at all mentioned about obligation.

This is not a homebirth movement lynching. There is so much more to this and I am relieved that others see this too. Indeed! Let the chips fall as they may.

DailyDiversion, you beat me to it ;)

SooperNanny, you've said way more than what I was prepared to about Ms Barrett as I'm trying to remain objective in that I'm waiting the report being that the Coroner is privy to far more than what the public could be. I am aware that she does face further charges as a result of recent deaths at home births in which she was in attendance but stress that investigations are currently under way. As an aside, two of my aunts are senior midwives and they do not support the contents of that website.

Thanks to all for this interesting discussion. It's such an important matter concerning us all and I'm glad it's still going. :yelclap:

[The sooper nanny]

I gave birth to a child. That doesn't mean I know everything about childbirth. :)



I do not subscribe to this statement in its absolute form. I believe that under certain circumstances where intervention has occurred, I think that it has been warranted. One example I can give was that when I was in the post natal ward the Police were called to assist staff in reinstating a child that had been taken from NICU by the child's mother and was on her way home. She was adamant that her premature and now dying child was well enough to go home. Should she have been allowed to go? Should her choices have been honoured? What of the child?

And then you have comments made by people who say they should've been allowed to birth at home but admit that medical intervention saved both their life and that of their baby's. This is fence sitting.

What a lot of women seem to forget is that they have another person to consider, someone that does not 'belong' to them but someone they are responsible for. And if you are told that you have a high risk birth and you choose to toss that knowledge aside and put that child in danger and 'the village' wants to make sure you have that child safely then I'm all for it. I find it unconscionable that there's so much emphasis on 'freedom' and nothing at all mentioned about obligation.

This is not a homebirth movement lynching. There is so much more to this and I am relieved that others see this too. Indeed! Let the chips fall as they may.

DailyDiversion, you beat me to it ;)

SooperNanny, you've said way more than what I was prepared to about Ms Barrett as I'm trying to remain objective in that I'm waiting the report being that the Coroner is privy to far more than what the public could be. I am aware that she does face further charges as a result of recent deaths at home births in which she was in attendance but stress that investigations are currently under way. As an aside, two of my aunts are senior midwives and they do not support the contents of that website.

Thanks to all for this interesting discussion. It's such an important matter concerning us all and I'm glad it's still going. :yelclap:

Here here!!
Events will come to light and she will be held criminally responsible I believe


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[The sooper nanny]

I don't understand how people put birth plan over safe sensible birthing choices. Who cares if there are canullas etc, if your doctor recommends a hospital birth then he wants to eliminate the worst possible fate. Too many people focus on 'natural' rather than safe delivery. I don't agree the woman should have a choice if there is risk to self or baby. I personally would never place my wants for delivery over the safe arrival of my children. I have worked so hard to get them. And before you all start arguing with me, people do have closed minds and decide this is how it will be no other way. I was at my fs office and he was on the phone to another ob and he was saying that Friggin woman wouldnt listen to me we nearly lost them both. He was so Friggin shaken and angry.

I understand his frustration
I totally agree with everything you have said


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[elleandsam]

I don't understand how people put birth plan over safe sensible birthing choices. Who cares if there are canullas etc, if your doctor recommends a hospital birth then he wants to eliminate the worst possible fate. Too many people focus on 'natural' rather than safe delivery. I don't agree the woman should have a choice if there is risk to self or baby. I personally would never place my wants for delivery over the safe arrival of my children. I have worked so hard to get them. And before you all start arguing with me, people do have closed minds and decide this is how it will be no other way. I was at my fs office and he was on the phone to another ob and he was saying that Friggin woman wouldnt listen to me we nearly lost them both. He was so Friggin shaken and angry.


It's wry easy to say this when you've never had a traumatic birth. Many women are given the high risk label or have doctors insisting on surgery for whole range of reasons like measuring big or having a high BMI. Plenty of heavy women give birth, plenty of big babies are born vaginally.my body, my baby, my choices.

Women aren't putting natural birth ABOVE a healthy baby, remember bad stuff happens in hospital too. Telling women they're putting birth above their babies is insulting. All women want healthy babies, that goes without saying. No one is getting pregnant to listen to emus, paint their bellies and burn scented candles.

But the birth experience is important too. Births and weddings, you relive the event on the anniversary every single year. You remember where you were every minute of that special day. I will remember my son's birth as having a needle shoved in my neck and hearing someone say "is she suppose to bleed that much" then waking up without my baby and then not seeing him for another 6 hours because midwives ignored my requests for help to sit up, to move, to see my baby. No one would ring NICU to check how he was. Then the NICU nurses refused to call after they promised they would the minute he woke, so I didn't hold him until he was 9 hours old an then not again until the next morning.

I had nightmares about my sons birth for months afterwards.

I didn't have a choice, it was in hospital or die. But if I chose to birth again I should be able to birth at home because I believe a Homebirth would be safe and it's my choice.

No woman deserves to be treated how I was, yet they are.

[hopefully2]

I am sorry you had a horrible birth experience. I would hate to think what would have happened without good professional assistance.

[brogeybear]

I don't choose homebirth for the candles and Enya music. I choose it because it provides the best possible environment to bring my child into the world. I choose it because it is optimal, because I will not settle for second rate. I choose it and I bear responsibility for my choice. I will not hand over my responsibility to *any* care provider. If *I* determine that it becomes necessary to go to hospital, or to seek certain treatment, then that is what I will do. NO ONE! and I mean NO ONE! has my babies best interests at heart more than me! The suggestion otherwise makes me see red!

[InBetween]

I will not hand over my responsibility to *any* care provider. If *I* determine that it becomes necessary to go to hospital, or to seek certain treatment, then that is what I will do.

The law does not allow you to have such a wide jurisdiction, Brogey :)
And thank God for that. For tragic mistakes are made even by those with the best of intentions.

By the way, I had a traumatic/dramatic birth and I'm glad I listened to my midwife when she advised me that a hospital birth was a better option for me. I had people offer condolences about "the horrible experience" until they realised I had the best outcome imaginable: a healthy baby.

[elleandsam]

I am sorry you had a horrible birth experience. I would hate to think what would have happened without good professional assistance.

There were a few good midwives and the actual delivery team were amazing. The midwives who were on the ante natal ward were awful, they kept forcing my support person to leave the room whenever they'd give me information or do a hand over, despite me begging to let them stay, now I can't remember anything I was told because of memory loss due to the GA. The NICU staff told me that my breastfeeding was an inconvenience. This is a baby friendly hospital. A nurse in NICU left DS sitting in his OWN URINE so long his temp dropped putting his discharge back 24 hours.

But yeah, they were totally professional. Perhaps if they had of been professional it would have been a good experience, instead it was traumatic.

[elleandsam]

What about emotional and mental health though? I'd argue that me waking every night in a cold sweat fearing that 'they' were coming to take my baby, is not healthy. Neither is a baby who has breathing difficulties due to having the wrong sized tube stuck down his throat.

[mrsdj1234]

Ok. So unless it is deemed 'safe' noone should get to make their own decisions about their life?
I am so sick of hearing that I shouldn't be able to make my own decisions regarding my life, because it is risky.

If Lisa Barrett is deemed negligent, it will not be left to be a reflection on her, it will end up turning into a media campaign against all homebirths.
If it was simply a case of investigating a negligent midwife, then we wouldn't have so much media coverage of the case.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[ourbradybunch]

Let's see what the coroner decides... There will be more inquests to come.
Her website is called midwife mutinity have a look and see what you think.
Yes, she supports women's choices but when that woman's choice is to accept that her baby is at risk of death, it is the midwives responsibility to stand back and say I'm not taking that risk. There is a place for hospital birth. Preterms breech and twins are on her website and some of the stuff she does makes me so angry.
Negligent



Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub


I agree & I find the situation disgusting, birth how you want with a common aim of most healthy delivery for your unborn baby:-(

[elleandsam]

Im not confusing anything, many women chose Homebirth because of poor post natal care. My bond with my son was difficult to establish, I believe in hindsight it was because the NICU nurses chose to settle him themselves instead of calling me down from the ward to feed him. We missed out on so much crucial time together.

We take risks every day. Driving cars, eating from dodgy take outs, we trust that if we step out on the road we won't get hit by a car, yet we aren't allowed to let our bodies do what they're designed to do because some doctor with an agenda says no.

[lambjam]

I'm concerned that people actually think a woman should be entirely responsible for decisions relating to her medical care (not to mention the medical care of the baby).

With the exception of those among us who actually are medical professionals, what makes anyone think they're an expert in childbirth? Having a heart attack doesn't make me a cardiologist any more than having a baby qualifies me to make those kinds of decisions on my own, or worse still to ignore all medical advise to the contrary.

The want for a home birth should never be confused with the need for emergency medical care. Having a baby is certainly a more emotional experience than having open heart surgery, but either experience can culminate in death.

Ok, crucify me now.

[brogeybear]

The law does not allow you to have such a wide jurisdiction, Brogey :)
And thank God for that. For tragic mistakes are made even by those with the best of intentions.

By the way, I had a traumatic/dramatic birth and I'm glad I listened to my midwife when she advised me that a hospital birth was a better option for me. I had people offer condolences about "the horrible experience" until they realised I had the best outcome imaginable: a healthy baby.

Actually, the law as it stands does allow me full autonomy over my own body, and thank goodness for that! I would be disgusted if you were suggesting that I should not have full autonomy over my body and the choices I make regarding it!

Tragic mistakes are made daily by all different people, professionals included. I *will not* hand over responsibility to a third party, and it is my human right to refuse to do so. When I seek medical care or opinion, I retain my autonomy, I do not hand it over.

[elleandsam]

I have come to terms with it, I went through hell to have a beautiful healthy boy, I faced my biggest fear (I have a phobia of needles and had them every 3 days minimum for 8 weeks) so that he could come into my life.

Doesn't change the fact that it was a ****ty situation and if I were pregnant again without placenta previa then I would avoid hospital. A csection and NICU was a necessary but unwanted part of my sons early life, if I don't need it again then I won't have it.

Women without life threatening issues shouldn't be subjected to what I went through, but sadly they are. Anyone can claim that women are given choice, but when I saw babies admitted for bigger all reason into NICU it opened my eyes to how things really are.

[Hootenanny]

This isn't about homebirth, it is about two homebirths, but I agree with pp that it will be made to be about homebirth. I am a bit of a fencesitter, I would have loved to have birthed at home, and respect the bodily autonomy of all women but still have reservations that there is a point where it may not always be in everyone's best interests.
I think the main issue at the moment is not homebirthing it is the rampant push to make it practically impossible to birth at home, instead of making it harder they should be making it easier. Hunter Health has a very good homebirth program that is publically funded and gives women choices whilst also having that 'safety net' for those who need it. There should be more services like this so the choices and decisions that were made by the midwife in question don't happen in the first place.

[mrsdj1234]

I'm concerned that people actually think a woman should be entirely responsible for decisions relating to her medical care (not to mention the medical care of the baby).

With the exception of those among us who actually are medical professionals, what makes anyone think they're an expert in childbirth? .

It is not about being responsible for your or your child's medical care, it's about being able to make the decision on when, where and how you receive medical care.





Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[higgleandgoot]

What a lot of women seem to forget is that they have another person to consider, someone that does not 'belong' to them but someone they are responsible for. And if you are told that you have a high risk birth and you choose to toss that knowledge aside and put that child in danger and 'the village' wants to make sure you have that child safely then I'm all for it. I find it unconscionable that there's so much emphasis on 'freedom' and nothing at all mentioned about obligation.




:yes: this.

[lambjam]

It is not about being responsible for your or your child's medical care, it's about being able to make the decision on when, where and how you receive medical care.

IMO determining exactly when a situation requires emergency intervention is not something most of us are capable of.

[hopefully2]

Here here lamb!

[Lillynix]

For me, a lot of this is about those two words "high risk", it's one of those terms that is just SO subjective. What one care provider might consider high risk, another doesn't, it varies from Ob to Ob, Midwife to Midwife and Hospital to Hospital and in some cases, those two words shouldn't even be used.

Some women are told they are high risk due to previous c-section, previous stillbirth, previous shoulder dystocia, high BP, small for dates, big for dates, she's too fat, too thin, too short, pelvis is too small, breech baby, twins the list goes on...

There is so much evidence and new studies happening that are showing that many of these current 'high risk' statuses are in fact, no longer high risk. Breech birth is one, there was a recent Canadian study done that is now supported by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, stating that not all breech should be automatic c-section.

VBAC is another, so many Obs and Hospitals claim to be VBAC friendly, when in fact they are not. If they were, i'm sure the VBAC success rate would be a lot higher. The main risk with VBAC is obviously Uterine Rupture but the more recent research suggests that there is no higher risk of Uterine Rupture with a VBAC than there is a first time woman in labour who has undergone augmentation of labour with synto, yet when the plan is to be induced with synto, no one ever mentions the risk of uterine rupture...well at least they didn't with myself or anyone else I know that was induced...

So yes, there are many women who choose to "disregard" their high risk status, and depending on why they are apparently classed as high risk, I don't blame them! Some cases are most definitely high risk, while others, not so much. But I personally don't know ANY woman, homebirther or otherwise, who would willingly put themselves or their unborn child in danger, and there mere suggestion that anyone would is highly insulting.

[elleandsam]

It is not about being responsible for your or your child's medical care, it's about being able to make the decision on when, where and how you receive medical care.





Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

^^ This

[IndigoJ]

oh and as for the news report about this so called breech birth the paper did call my friends but they declined to comment at all. so their information came from their imagination. great reporting huh.

That report isnt linked here yet.

After reading the report and talking to the mum, the report is that false its laughable.

[mrsdj1234]

IMO determining exactly when a situation requires emergency intervention is not something most of us are capable of.

I'm sorry if you are incapable to determining if you need emergency medical care, but I am more than capable of determining when myself or my family needs medical attention. All of my family are healthy and alive, thanks to my decisions regarding when to seek medical attention.





Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[sweetseven]

I'm concerned that people actually think a woman should be entirely responsible for decisions relating to her medical care (not to mention the medical care of the baby).

With the exception of those among us who actually are medical professionals, what makes anyone think they're an expert in childbirth?


Actually, the law as it stands does allow me full autonomy over my own body, and thank goodness for that! I would be disgusted if you were suggesting that I should not have full autonomy over my body and the choices I make regarding it!

Tragic mistakes are made daily by all different people, professionals included. I *will not* hand over responsibility to a third party, and it is my human right to refuse to do so. When I seek medical care or opinion, I retain my autonomy, I do not hand it over.Medical proffesionals are there to advise, but that advice comes coloured with that professionals personal views. It is up to the individual involved as to how much credence they give any advice received.

Individual autonomy is very important.

[TinyLittleTootsies]

I'm sorry if you are incapable to determining if you need emergency medical care, but I am more than capable of determining when myself or my family needs medical attention. All of my family are healthy and alive, thanks to my decisions regarding when to seek medical attention.





Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

She is obviously not talking about every day situations. She is talking about how quickly a normal birth can go wrong and how most women in labour wouldn't know what is happening before it is too late if something out of the ordinary happened.
There are plenty of stories of women who refuse induction, refuse c-section and then their baby has died or suffered brain damage because they wanted full autonomy and got it. They refused to beleive that experts in the field knew more than their instinct that their baby was ok and that the monitors can lie (as is a popular belief). This is the type of situation where I am sorry, but the mother has caused suffering and is not the expert, and her delusions of knowing what is best has caused serious injury or death to the baby.

Also aside from only birthing situations, when they are in extreme pain, a lot of patients actually refuse help in hospitals, rip out their lines etc. They then get told they have no choice and are detained for treatment. The person gets better, stops being delerious and thanks the hospital for saving them. If they had let the pain-crazed person walk onto the street like a lot want to... that would be an outrage! I am glad the law can and will step in.

[delirium]

I'm not going to quote people as everyone's entitled to their opinions and it is a very passionate topic for parents. But one that that has stood out to me in this thread is that some are making out some women hb as a fashion statement, only caring about the experience. The thing is, that many women that HB are doing what they firmly believe (and what lots of research backs up) is the best for their child.

Some experience birth rape, births were drs take the child dangerously close to death. Completely unnecessary interventions that have affected the quality of life of the mother and child.

As I usually am, I'm a middle ground person. I personally would never HB in a *true* high risk situation. Bc in those rare times, I DO believe that's what ob's are there for - high risk births. My issue is that the obstetrics profession and the AMA have made almost everything high risk. Breech is high risk, not dilating in a hour or 2 is high risk, a baby above or below 3kg is high risk. It negates the truely high risk situations like placental abruption and I believe it's purpose it to make ob's indespensible. Bc if women worked out that in most cases they weren't even needed, well there goes their overseas holiday and their egos.

[Mumma29]

I'm sorry if you are incapable to determining if you need emergency medical care, but I am more than capable of determining when myself or my family needs medical attention. All of my family are healthy and alive, thanks to my decisions regarding when to seek medical attention.
Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

^^^
I find this statement offensive. I think many people confuse luck/good fortune with knowledge.

As for the inquests - I think it is a tragic situation and no body in those circumstances would have intended for the outcome to be so poor, but if the inquests do find that changing some regulations in regard to homebirth to make it safer then that can only be a good thing.
As with all statistics with anything numbers impersonal but if u add stories to them some women may change their mind on what sort of birth they want - but are they really LESS informed?

[escapethefate]

Everyone makes mistakes, medical professionals or otherwise. I had a terrible birth experience with ds1. I had a placental abruption-undiagnosed until after I went into shock and had a PPH. I also had pre eclampsia- again "speculated" during pregnancy but undiagnosed until I had post partum eclamptic seizures and a stroke. Both of these 10 hours after I gave birth. In hospital. With an experienced middie and a private ob. My midwife also didn't check to see if I was dilated even though I told her I felt the baby's head, because I "hadn't been in labour long enough" I then ended up in icu and couldn't see my son for 2 days, not even to feed him. Ive given birth to all 3 of my children in hospital and ds1 is the only traumatic birth I've had, but in saying that, I plan to hb this time regardless, and I've been deemed high risk every pregnancy. I'm not choosing my own "wants" over the safety of my child, I'm weighing up the pros and cons and making a decision based on this. As all women should, and I'm sure do. Because my milk dried up with ds1, does that mean I potentially put my other 2 at risk of starving to death because I tried (successfully) to bf again? No, I don't believe so.

[mrsdj1234]

Why do ppl believe that anyone who homebirths is risking their child's and their own life?
And why do those fear homebirth insist that noone should homebirth?
I don't hold it against anyone who chooses to have an elective c-section, just because I don't agree with them. I don't say they are reckless and ignoring the risks. In fact, I demand that there is still that option for those who choose it. Why? Because everyone should have the right to determine what they want done to their bodies.
And that is what frustrates me, is that I may loose my right to birth the way I want.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[delirium]

For me, a lot of this is about those two words "high risk", it's one of those terms that is just SO subjective. What one care provider might consider high risk, another doesn't, it varies from Ob to Ob, Midwife to Midwife and Hospital to Hospital and in some cases, those two words shouldn't even be used.

Some women are told they are high risk due to previous c-section, previous stillbirth, previous shoulder dystocia, high BP, small for dates, big for dates, she's too fat, too thin, too short, pelvis is too small, breech baby, twins the list goes on...

There is so much evidence and new studies happening that are showing that many of these current 'high risk' statuses are in fact, no longer high risk. Breech birth is one, there was a recent Canadian study done that is now supported by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, stating that not all breech should be automatic c-section.

VBAC is another, so many Obs and Hospitals claim to be VBAC friendly, when in fact they are not. If they were, i'm sure the VBAC success rate would be a lot higher. The main risk with VBAC is obviously Uterine Rupture but the more recent research suggests that there is no higher risk of Uterine Rupture with a VBAC than there is a first time woman in labour who has undergone augmentation of labour with synto, yet when the plan is to be induced with synto, no one ever mentions the risk of uterine rupture...well at least they didn't with myself or anyone else I know that was induced...


Totally agree, and what I've been trying to say :)

[TinyLittleTootsies]

Why do ppl believe that anyone who homebirths is risking their child's and their own life?
And why do those fear homebirth insist that noone should homebirth?
I don't hold it against anyone who chooses to have an elective c-section, just because I don't agree with them. I don't say they are reckless and ignoring the risks. In fact, I demand that there is still that option for those who choose it. Why? Because everyone should have the right to determine what they want done to their bodies.
And that is what frustrates me, is that I may loose my right to birth the way I want.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

I believe that women should have the birth they want. I agree with homebirth being the best choice for many women. My sister had a homebirth and it was her easiest and best, because she gets very anxious being in a hospital.

All my point is that if you are high risk (as in, actually high risk) you should seek medical help when appropriate and sometimes a hospital is the best choice. Some times women do not see this or agree and this is what I do not agree with. One woman at the hospital my DH works at came in over 20 days overdue and refused a c-section but wanted induction and her baby died. The whole time she said she knows her body and baby the best. Nothing else was determined wrong with the baby except that the placenta had stopped feeding her baby. This is when I think lines get crossed and some times you need to know that medical professionals want to help and that some times the mother doesn't know best.

I think a lot of people get confused with people (like me) saying there is a need for hospitals, with us being against homebirth, because it is easier to accuse us of being against home birth rather then the fact that we truly agree women should have a choice.... right until it comes to a point when their choice is hurting another human being.

[mrsdj1234]

^^^
I find this statement offensive. I think many people confuse luck/good fortune with knowledge.



I'm sorry you found my statement offensive, but I myself was offended at the post I quoted in my post.
How can you say that my decisions have only been good luck/fortune when you do not know anything about me? You do not know that I regularly keep updated in regards to first aid, that I have extensive wound care knowledge thanks to my previous employment and that I continue to educate myself regarding most things medical (I find it facinating).
And the above is the reason why making assumptions about others, including homebirthers, is just plain stupid.



Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[mrsdj1234]

TLT, it is not someone like you that frustrates me, it's the others in this thread that have all but said that homebirth should be illegal.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[TinyLittleTootsies]

TLT, it is not someone like you that frustrates me, it's the others in this thread that have all but said that homebirth should be illegal.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

Ok, good, just wanted to make my stance clear because your post came after mine :).

Homebirth should never be illegal. There are very good reasons why it is the best choice for a lot of women.

[elleandsam]

Women should never be persecuted for refusing major surgery. Mothers are not putting their children in harms way by choice. Many women believe there is just as much risk of harm in hospital births if not more.

The assumption that homebirthers care more about their experience of birth then their babies is just plain wrong.

Who choses who is high risk and who isn't? Will it be all women between the ages of x and x, weigh between x and x, singleton pregnancy, no prior stillbirths, no prior surgeries, no known allergies, and lives within x kms of large tertiary hospital will be allowed to birth only with one of a particular group of midwives. Anyone else caught birthing at home will be persecuted?

[Mumma29]

I'm sorry you found my statement offensive, but I myself was offended at the post I quoted in my post.
How can you say that my decisions have only been good luck/fortune when you do not know anything about me? You do not know that I regularly keep updated in regards to first aid, that I have extensive wound care knowledge thanks to my previous employment and that I continue to educate myself regarding most things medical (I find it facinating).
And the above is the reason why making assumptions about others, including homebirthers, is just plain stupid.



Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

You are correct I dont know your situation, thats why I said many people - not u specifically. What I find offensive was your reply to the poster where they are accused of being incapable. I am sure your choices have been right for you and your family, and I dont mean luck/ good fortune with the aloofness you may have interpreted. I am just saying that people are faced with all sorts of emergency situations and it would be arrogant to suggest anyone would know correct course of action in all situations (even ones they have read about in books, on the interenet, discussed with people). I too keep my first aid up to date and work in health but I would in no way claim to have all the answers!
Oh and just for the record I support home births, I want them to be a valid and supported option for women and their families - thats why the inquest should go ahead - to improve safety and conditions, just as hospitals engage in ongoing research and procedure reviews.

[elleandsam]

These cases, if Lisa is found negligent, will be used as a precedent, other Homebirth stillbirths could lead to parents being persecuted.

[hopefully2]

Prosecuted

[DaddyLarge]

These cases, if Lisa is found negligent, will be used as a precedent, other Homebirth stillbirths could lead to parents being persecuted.

The fact that it could set a precedent, though, should not preclude an investigation. No one should be able to hide behind the fear of setting a precedent if, in fact, they have done something worthy of prosecution.

[Alexander Beetle]

STVD that is a heartbreaking story!

[delirium]

I do agree if she was negligent she should be prosecuted. As I have said, IM's make mistakes too, and while I fully support HB I do believe that no one should be above the law.

But IF she is found at fault, it should be seen that SHE was at fault, not that HB itself is inherently dangerous. I can see a witch hunt ensuing, provoked by the AMA to use this one case as a cause to illegalise HB, and I do not support that.

[trishalishous]

yes i had complications, but the major one was when they (ob) decided i wasnt birthing the placenta quickly enough (according to my note it had been 4minutes) and thought he'd pull on it, causing my uterus to come out of my vagina. and possibly damaging it permanently (7 months TTC so far) not to menton killing me ( i bled to death and was resuscitated)
never would have happened at home
and based on that im high risk and 'must' have a preterm csection (if i ever manage to fall pregnant)

[elleandsam]

I think that the fact that the mothers involved still support Lisa speaks volumes, I think if a parent doesn't want an inquest into a neonatal death then there shouldn't be one. How utterly gut wrenching for those mothers to not only lose their babies but to have to relive it again and again through the courts.

[InBetween]

I think if a parent doesn't want an inquest into a neonatal death then there shouldn't be one.


Yeah, let's just cover it up, pretend it never happened and not ask questions just in case, God forbid, we are then required to seek justice for the child or to protect other children from possible harm.

[DaddyLarge]

I'll only speak for me here, but the inquest isn't my issue. IM's can be negligent like any professionsal. My issue is that HB is always so much more under the microscope, imo the AMA has a great deal to do with this. It is prurely my opinion, but they have made it very clear they want HB gone, and not for valid reasons but for their own selfish interests.

Sorry, I missed you reply.

Believe me - I have absolutely no love for the AMA. They are no more than a union, but instead of representing the interests of teachers or construction workers, they advocate for the interests of doctors. Somehow, though, they have been successful in their attempts to cloak their single-minded pursuit of doctors' interests as being about the interests of the public at large, which is very often not the case.

That said, it is, should and always will be the case that whatever varies from the norm is going to be given the greater attention, both by the media and the powers-that-be.

This reality isn't necessarily a comment on the alternative. It merely reflects the fact that a centralised system is far easier to monitor and regulate, in regards to both the system itself and the professionals that operate within it. The parallel experiences and providers, by their very nature, need more effort and attention in order to provide the same level of protection for those involved.

An apt comparison would be homeschooling, for example.

[4underfour]

First let me say I am pro home birth.

Now that's out of the way, I'd like to ask why so many of you other pro homebirthers are against this investigation? What is there to hide?

I'm actually not sure what ethically sits right with me in regards to a pregnant mothers rights when they are in conflict with an unborn baby's rights (after viability age). Yes, you can have a termination after viability gestation but to do so you have to go through a heap of hoops with psych assessment etc. But in theory you could make choices during birth that may well lead to a dead baby. And if that baby never takes a breath then nobody is accountable? I think we do have a responsibility to our unborn innocents. But then I understand the argument our body our choice. Gah! I just don't know

[trishalishous]

Prosecuted

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution

such as SDVT friends, currently PERSECUTED for HB

[hopefully2]

This dr raises pertinent points about why these two births were considered too dangerous for home delivery. That is the topic. All for home delivery when it is safe but these two particular women made choices that was only accommodated by this lady as they couldn't get what they wanted anywhere else and for good reason.

They are not holding her culpable coz as others state they feel their body their choice. Shame the cost was their precious bundles.

[elleandsam]

I did mean persecuted. But prosecuted as fits. I don't need anyone to correct me though. 2 small children often all over me while I throw a reply together on an iPhone means typos happen.

Can we not quote Dr Blamey. She is so anti-Homebirth that her opinion is do biased I makes me sick. She is so unprofessional and so anti- natural birth.

Besides, isn't posting links to blogs outside of BH against the rules?

[mrsdj1234]

I can't multiquote cause I'm on my phone, but in answer to the question about why I am against the inquest, my answer is that I am not. What I am against is that it has been deliberately turned into media event. Even if Lisa is found not guilty, her reputation has been disgraced and homebirth has been portrayed to only be dangerous.


Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[delirium]

Oh please, please can we refrain from posting links to bloggers whose modus operandi is to garner outrage? This thread has already run wildly off topic, let’s not destroy it completely, hey? Thanks.

Maybe if you are feeling so angry it's best you step away for a awhile, I do that when I'm feeling riled up (and I mean that genuinely not as a stab).

I don't think things have run wildly off topic, we are discussing the ramifications to HB that this ruling may bring, why women HB under 'risky' situations (which is what some are saying these women were). Just like a conversation things tend to go outside the parameters of the initial post.

[Hokey Pokey]

I think it depends on your hospital, some are okay but others are pretty bad. Many times I've heard of VBACers being told they require CFM, cannula on admission, cannot go post dates. Seeing as I would refuse a 12 week scan, GTT and most likely the morphology scan, I would want to birth in water and be lotus birthing, I really can't see how a hospital birth would fit for me.

Sorry, I didn't mean that you should have a hospital birth, just trying to re assure you that too can try for a VBAC (wether home or what not). :hugs:

[elleandsam]

This dr raises pertinent points about why these two births were considered too dangerous for home delivery. That is the topic. All for home delivery when it is safe but these two particular women made choices that was only accommodated by this lady as they couldn't get what they wanted anywhere else and for good reason.

They are not holding her culpable coz as others state they feel their body their choice. Shame the cost was their precious bundles.

The whole "they would have lived if they had of been born elsewhere" argument is a moot point. Babies die in hospital, they die at home. Not all babies will live, it's tragic, it's sad, it's life.

Web are not merely the vessel in which a fetus gestates, yet if we continue down this path removing women's choices then that's where we'll end up.

Fwiw I don't think there is a single mother out there birthing for the gold stars and push presents, no one is sacrificing babies just for the perfect birth. We all make the choices that are eat for us.

You can't claim to support a woman's right to choice and then make said support conditional. You either support women's choice and right to bodily autonomy and respect their decisions even if you don't agree with that decision, or you don't.

[hopefully2]

Thanks.

[hopefully2]

That thanks was to delirium.

[hopefully2]

So you are saying issues are black or white sorry couldn't quite follow.

[elleandsam]

Web = women
Eat = best
Go to hell autocorrect!

[trishalishous]

You can't claim to support a woman's right to choice and then make said support conditional. You either support women's choice and right to bodily autonomy and respect their decisions even if you don't agree with that decision, or you don't.

this. [text removed by moderator] i hate that it ever has to be chosen for any reason. it is a choice i will never make. but i will never support the choice being taken away.
and just as no woman ever wakes up one day and says 'hmm i might have an abortion today' no woman randomly chooses HB.
without access to hb midwives, some people will freebirth and more babie will die

[elleandsam]

Can I just say I had a private hospital birth with my first which was super empowering and I would do over and over every day of the week. A necessary csection with my second due to placenta previa. And :fingerscrossed: with my 3rd in about 3 years I want a HBAC, because I can't afford a private hospital and I believe continuity f care you get with a private care provider, Better with an IM but also if you stumble across an awesome OB, is second to none.

My BFF is having an elective csection in Jan, and I am so thrilled for her! It's what she wants, it's what she feels wil be best for her and bubs and I know she is super informed in her choices.

[hopefully2]

In medical situations as a result of duty of care there are times when we should have choice removed. Not to spite but to preserve. We put trust in these people to keep us and our unborn safe. They take choice away coz they have the years of study, experience and obligation to do so.

These two women obviously knew the risk of homebirthing after emergency csections and are now probably suffering terribly.

I don't say no to homebirth but no to homebirth when reputable knowledgable well educated informed professionals advice against it.

The only reason to advise against hb is for your and your baby's well being.

[elleandsam]

You really don't think OBs have a vested interest in keeping patients and money flowing through the hospital system? Really? A rise in Homebirth would mean a decline in public maternity patients.

And I know my rights, at any point at any time I can refuse treatment. That right must be preserved. To be frank, too many public hospital midwives that I met at my stay at RPA assume that you'll just go along with what they say. I had to scream at a midwife to get the fuxk away from me after she repeatedly ignored my demands to get out of the bathroom I was fine, my friend was helping me shower. I'm a rape survivor, I can't cope with strangers seeing me naked (one of the reasons I need continuity of care) and it says so on my file, she obviously didn't read that bit.

Bodily autonomy and a patients right to chose their care provider and model of care must be preserved.

[mrsdj1234]

The problem with 'reliable professionals' is that they all have differing versions of high risk.
As stated by others things like high BMI are considered high risk by some. As is previous big babies.
I am obese and my smallest child was born weighing in at 4.36 kgs. Yet even in this 'high risk' category, I have birthed with ease and no complications 3 times. So because I am 'high risk' I should only be able to birth in hospital? Even with the evidence that my risk factors don't affect my capability to birth unhindered?

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[hopefully2]

As a person surrounded by medical friends, they are the least motivated by money. They do that job to save lives and bring joy into the world.

[4underfour]

You really don't think OBs have a vested interest in keeping patients and money flowing through the hospital system? Really? A rise in Homebirth would mean a decline in public maternity patients.

preserved.

I can tell you now as someone who knows many obs and ob registrars personally, that they couldn't care less if some women want to birth at home. Public obs get a wage, doesn't matter how many patients go through. It would take some of the pressure off in fact. What obs DO care about is avoiding unnecessary deaths due to some women caring more about their birthing experience than a living baby. Then once the woman gets to hospital the doctors have to pick up the pieces. Can you imagine how distressing it would be to deliver a dead baby that could have been saved in hospital?

[mrsdj1234]

As a person surrounded by medical friends, they are the least motivated by money. They do that job to save lives and bring joy into the world.
I'm sorry but that is laughable. Unless all your friends are working in a voluntary capacity, they are doing it for the money. Yes they may enjoy the work immensely, but it will still be for the pay check. Even IMs are working for the money. They love their work but at the end of the day they need/want the money.


Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[delirium]

This is the Ob that could have done my c/s and his views on HB. I know there are wonderful ones out there, but I believe many share his beliefs.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/babies-by-the-dozen-but-medic-says-home-birth-too-risky-20101205-18lc5.html

[FluffyDucks]

I have no opinion on whether a women chooses to Home Birth or Free Birth or Hospital Birth or whatever birth they want. Doesnt bother me. I wouldnt home birth but thats my choice.

What I AM interested in is statistics....big believer in numbers as numbers dont lie (sure they can be interperted in different ways but we dont need to go into that).

So if this has become a debate about Home Birthing can someone pull out some stats that talk about how many deaths, injuries, etc that occur with Home Birthing and Hospital Birthing? If the numbers overwhelmingly say that there is 20% death/injury rate in Hospital births and a 5% death/injury rate with Home Births you would conclude that Home Birthing is safer (and vice versa with the stats).

All these opinions here on this thread are interesting but for me, without the hard facts (be it inquest or statistical data), this is all only opinion. I wouldnt base my decision to birth a certain way without that information.

And I am sure I will get flamed for this....but was is wrong with regulating home births? Call me naive if you want but I see nothing wrong with setting some guidelines that the carers should follow in they choose that option (if there already is I apologise).

[elleandsam]

I can tell you now as someone who knows many obs and ob registrars personally, that they couldn't care less if some women want to birth at home. Public obs get a wage, doesn't matter how many patients go through. It would take some of the pressure off in fact. What obs DO care about is avoiding unnecessary deaths due to some women caring more about their birthing experience than a living baby. Then once the woman gets to hospital the doctors have to pick up the pieces. Can you imagine how distressing it would be to deliver a dead baby that could have been saved in hospital?

But there is truly no way of telling whether or not a baby could have been saved.

If we're all about avoiding unnecessary deaths then why not ban circumcision as well, baby boys die during that procedure and that could be avoided.

[hopefully2]

I said motivated by money. They didn't go into medicine to be rich. It's long hours away from family, emotionally draining, physically hard and very spiritually and ethically challenging.

[mrsdj1234]

Why does everyone think that this is women choosing a homebirth over having a live child?!
No mother in her right mind would purposefully endanger her own child, just so she can have a 'birthing experience'.
I am disgusted that any woman can think so poorly of another woman.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[elleandsam]

Why does everyone think that this is women choosing a homebirth over having a live child?!
No mother in her right mind would purposefully endanger her own child, just so she can have a 'birthing experience'. I an


Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

^^ This.

A homebirth is just as valid a choice as a private hospital birth.

[InBetween]

thank you to the few that paid attention to my friends story

Apart from the fact that I routinely ignore those who feel the need to yell at everyone, I read the story but couldn't work out which story in here you were referring to so I didn't comment.


If we're all about avoiding unnecessary deaths then why not ban circumcision as well, baby boys die during that procedure and that could be avoided.

Do they? That's interesting.


So if this has become a debate about Home Birthing

It's become that way due to gung ho pro Home Birthers and the assumption that those who feel the inquest is fair are against home birthing :) As you will see by earlier posts by various people, we were trying to discuss the Coroner's inquest and the investigation into the deaths of babies that were attended by former midwife Lisa Barrett.

Unfortunately, emotion and lack of knowledge are getting in the way of this.

[elleandsam]

I have no opinion on whether a women chooses to Home Birth or Free Birth or Hospital Birth or whatever birth they want. Doesnt bother me. I wouldnt home birth but thats my choice.

What I AM interested in is statistics....big believer in numbers as numbers dont lie (sure they can be interperted in different ways but we dont need to go into that).

So if this has become a debate about Home Birthing can someone pull out some stats that talk about how many deaths, injuries, etc that occur with Home Birthing and Hospital Birthing? If the numbers overwhelmingly say that there is 20% death/injury rate in Hospital births and a 5% death/injury rate with Home Births you would conclude that Home Birthing is safer (and vice versa with the stats).

All these opinions here on this thread are interesting but for me, without the hard facts (be it inquest or statistical data), this is all only opinion. I wouldnt base my decision to birth a certain way without that information.

And I am sure I will get flamed for this....but was is wrong with regulating home births? Call me naive if you want but I see nothing wrong with setting some guidelines that the carers should follow in they choose that option (if there already is I apologise).

Wriggly baby so can't post directly but
http://mybirth.com.au/birth-stats/
http://www.mybirth.com.au/natural-birth/environment/home-birth-statistics.html

[elleandsam]

Do they? That's interesting.



It's become that way due to gung ho pro Home Birthers and the assumption that those who feel the inquest is fair are against home birthing :) As you will see by earlier posts by various people, we were trying to discuss the Coroner's inquest and the investigation into the deaths of babies that were attended by former midwife Lisa Barrett.

Unfortunately, emotion and lack of knowledge are getting in the way of this.


http://www.circinfo.net/risks_of_circumcision.html

Don't assume I'm uneducated just because I don't agree with you.

[Lillynix]

Sorry, I got as far as ivfhopeful's link to Dr. Amy's blog and just had to stop and comment.

Please, that woman has a long running hatred of homebirth AND midwives, not just homebirth midwives, but ALL midwives, she claims to be an Ob, though she hasn't practised in many years and these days spends her time trolling forums, taking screen shots of posts, then ripping them apart on her blog. She goes out of her way to cause trouble. She's a natural birth hater. Did you read that? SHE HATES NATURAL BIRTH!

Don't for a second, anyone believe that her points are valid, because she has a way of twisting just about everything to suit her own agenda, which is to make homebirth everywhere illegal and for midwives to do nothing more than obey the orders of the Obstetricians, like their lowly servants.

I think that posting something so horrendously hilarious as that link just trivialises this whole thread.

[hopefully2]

It's not a debate about choosing a living baby it's a choice to have a 'high risk' birth in hospital, where there are facilities, doctors, etc. If you know you are having a high risk at home then you also know that you are taking chances with your babies successful/fatal delivery.

[elleandsam]

Sorry, I got as far as ivfhopeful's link to Dr. Amy's blog and just had to stop and comment.

Please, that woman has a long running hatred of homebirth AND midwives, not just homebirth midwives, but ALL midwives, she claims to be an Ob, though she hasn't practised in many years and these days spends her time trolling forums, taking screen shots of posts, then ripping them apart on her blog. She goes out of her way to cause trouble. She's a natural birth hater. Did you read that? SHE HATES NATURAL BIRTH!

Don't for a second, anyone believe that her thoughts are valid, because she has a way of twisting just about everything to suit her own agenda, which is to mad=ke homebirth everwhere illegal and for midwives to do nothing more than obey the orders of the Obstetricians, like their lowly servants.

I think that posting something so horrendously hilarious as that link just trivialises this whole thread.

Don't forget she has screen capped and posted BH.

:wave: Dr Wingnut.

[Lillynix]

But again, it all comes back down to WHAT is considered "high risk".

There will no doubt be times when it is a 100% definite high risk case and no one would argue with that, if there was a REAL risk of danger to mother and baby, then NO ONE would choose to birth at home when hospital was required, I know a LOT of homebirthers, and none of them would ever be so flippant as to ignore a true case of high risk pregnancy and/or birth.

But again, MANY women are told they are high risk, when in fact, they aren't. They may be high risk according to that particular Midwife, or that particular Obstetrician, or that particular Hospital's policies, but they may not be considered at a high enough risk that it would completely rule out a safe homebirth.

[elleandsam]

It's not a debate about choosing a living baby it's a choice to have a 'high risk' birth in hospital, where there are facilities, doctors, etc. If you know you are having a high risk at home then you also know that you are taking chances with your babies successful/fatal delivery.

But who choses which mothers are high risk and which aren't? Different OBs have different opinions on what is high risk.

[hopefully2]

I don't understand why when people disagree they have to be insulting. Don't agree. Have an intellectual, interesting debate but seriously being rude just not necessary and shows not my colours but yours.

I am not aware that she is against natural delivery but I do know her points against Lisa Barrett are valid. That is all I quoted.

[hopefully2]

People who have studied the field for at least eight years. Who have seen and experienced risk. Take theirs or take Lisa Barrett? Over and out.

[mrsdj1234]

It's not a debate about choosing a living baby it's a choice to have a 'high risk' birth in hospital, where there are facilities, doctors, etc. If you know you are having a high risk at home then you also know that you are taking chances with your babies successful/fatal delivery.

If you are that high risk, the risk is not reduced by being in a hospital.
In the case of the bub with the stuck shoulder, nothing in a hospital setting would have made it less likely, except for surgery which can't happen immediately anyway, so the outcome would most likely have been the same.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[elleandsam]

I don't understand why when people disagree they have to be insulting. Don't agree. Have an intellectual, interesting debate but seriously being rude just not necessary and shows not my colours but yours.

I am not aware that she is against natural delivery but I do know her points against Lisa Barrett are valid. That is all I quoted.

I don't feel I've been rude towards you. I know Dr Amy googles herself, and seeing as she has torn strips off a wonderful friend of mine I don't care about rudeness towards her.

I did find your assumption and then correction of my post earlier in the thread rude and patronising, but whatever.

[elleandsam]

I don't understand why when people disagree they have to be insulting. Don't agree. Have an intellectual, interesting debate but seriously being rude just not necessary and shows not my colours but yours.

I am not aware that she is against natural delivery but I do know her points against Lisa Barrett are valid. That is all I quoted.

Go and sit in hospital for any period of time, you'll every change of shift a new opinion and a different assessment of risk.

[Lillynix]

Also, i'd like to point out that other than offering my support to the Midwife in question, I haven't actually commented more on the inquest itself or offer up my further opinion on the matter.

I also feel I haven't been rude towards anyone in this thread. I posted about Dr. mAiMY simply because there could be many others reading this thread and I would hate for them to think that she is a credible source, as she is not.

[DaddyLarge]

Why does everyone think that this is women choosing a homebirth over having a live child?!

Everyone?


No mother in her right mind would purposefully endanger her own child, just so she can have a 'birthing experience'.
I am disgusted that any woman can think so poorly of another woman.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

Of course, no woman in her right mind would do such a thing. However, it could very possibly be the case that women who are inadequately appraised of the situation and the risks of their particular circumstances might make a decision based on faulty information.

Contrary to the agenda that is being pushed, those of us who haven't taken umbrage at the impertinence of a coroner investigating two deaths aren't necessarily campaigning against homebirthing. A coronial inquest is about finding the truth: Were the parents properly informed? Did the professionals in attendance fulfil their duty-of-care and professonal obligations? Were the deaths avoidable, and if so was anyone criminally negligent? Can procedures be changed in order to provide parents with a more complete understanding of their circumstances?

All of these are sound, NECESSARY questions. Luckily, we have a time-tested mechanism in this country to investigate such questions - a coronial inquiry. The righteous have nothing to fear from scrutiny, and I find it incredible that people are insisting on propagating this "supporting an inquest means that you're against a woman's right to choose homebirthing" strawman.

It is nonsense, doesn't reflect the truth and does nothing to promote intelligent discussion.

[hopefully2]

I wasn't referring to you. Our posts must have come in at the same time. I thought you meant prosecuted. Anyway enough of this for me. Safe deliveries all.

By the way emergency surgery happens immediately in the hospital whoever posted otherwise.

[Hokey Pokey]

Everyone?



Of course, no woman in her right mind would do such a thing. However, it could very possibly be the case that women who are inadequately appraised of the situation and the risks of their particular circumstances might make a decision based on faulty information.

Contrary to the agenda that is being pushed, those of us who haven't taken umbrage at the impertinence of a coroner investigating two deaths aren't necessarily campaigning against homebirthing. A coronial inquest is about finding the truth: Were the parents properly informed? Did the professionals in attendance fulfil their duty-of-care and professonal obligations? Were the deaths avoidable, and if so was anyone criminally negligent? Can procedures be changed in order to provide parents with a more complete understanding of their circumstances?

All of these are sound, NECESSARY questions. Luckily, we have a time-tested mechanism in this country to investigate such questions - a coronial inquiry. The righteous have nothing to fear from scrutiny, and I find it incredible that people are insisting on propagating this "supporting an inquest means that you're against a woman's right to choose homebirthing" strawman.

It is nonsense, doesn't reflect the truth and does nothing to promote intelligent discussion.
Well said!!

[elleandsam]

I wasn't referring to you. Our posts must have come in at the same time. I thought you meant prosecuted. Anyway enough of this for me. Safe deliveries all.

By the way emergency surgery happens immediately in the hospital whoever posted otherwise.

Even immediately sometimes is not quick enough in some cases.

[mrsdj1234]

DL, I agree that the inquest should happen

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[hopefully2]

Daddylarge you are a genius. Why cant I write like that? Well put.

[hopefully2]

Daddylarge-do you think that these women were not warned about the risks of vbacs by other health professionals?

[InBetween]

Don't assume I'm uneducated just because I don't agree with you.

Does that mean I am free to assume you're uneducated anyway? :D My comment about boys dying during RIC was absolutely deadset serious and not one made in mockery. If you have any Australian links that would be great as I do genuinely find that claim to be interesting.

Lilly, I hear you. I mentioned this too but was sanctioned for what another poster felt was me "telling what people should or shouldn't post". So I had a little cry...:laughing: and carried on.

In fact, I think much of this diversionary talk - accusations of being rude, being against home birth, excuses being made for Barrett's documented conduct is a deliberate ruse to get this discussion off track so that the questions that really do need to be asked are not answered and are summarily dismissed as persecutory delusions.

[elleandsam]

Everyone?



Of course, no woman in her right mind would do such a thing. However, it could very possibly be the case that women who are inadequately appraised of the situation and the risks of their particular circumstances might make a decision based on faulty information.

Contrary to the agenda that is being pushed, those of us who haven't taken umbrage at the impertinence of a coroner investigating two deaths aren't necessarily campaigning against homebirthing. A coronial inquest is about finding the truth: Were the parents properly informed? Did the professionals in attendance fulfil their duty-of-care and professonal obligations? Were the deaths avoidable, and if so was anyone criminally negligent? Can procedures be changed in order to provide parents with a more complete understanding of their circumstances?

All of these are sound, NECESSARY questions. Luckily, we have a time-tested mechanism in this country to investigate such questions - a coronial inquiry. The righteous have nothing to fear from scrutiny, and I find it incredible that people are insisting on propagating this "supporting an inquest means that you're against a woman's right to choose homebirthing" strawman.

It is nonsense, doesn't reflect the truth and does nothing to promote intelligent discussion.



What about the big picture though? There's another case where photos, video and eye witness evidence all say the baby was stillborn yet a coronal inquest is going ahead... Against the parents!

Looking at the inquest alone, sure it seems like a good idea, however combine it with, the story in this thread about the ordeal a Homebirth couple went through just because Lisa attended, the AMA policy statement, the recent counts by a high profile OB about older mums being selfish... Homebirth won't be regulated, it will just be outlawed.

Homebirth doesn't need more policiesx hospital policy is what drives many women to. chose Homebirth. I refuse to allow someone into my home who will the tell me when to push, when to move, and what to do.

[mrsdj1234]

Damn app and tiny buttons with fat fingers.
DL, I agree with the inquest, just not with the way the media coverage is. Personally I think that such inquests should not be allowed to be reported until a finding is reached. And the way the media is going about making the point it was a homebirth midwife and not just a midwife is what will affect homebirth.

And I was the one IVFhopeful that commented on emergency surgery and the wait. Theaters need to be preped, surgeons need to get to the theater, anesthiologist needs to be brought to theater. It all takes precious minutes to get sorted.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[delirium]

I don't think an inquest directly means being against home birth. I actually support transparency and accountability of the HB system. It will create a safer industry that will demand to be taken seriously as a viable, safe option rather than a dangerous one. I want HB standards to be high, that in itself will ensure it's on the table for women to choose.

It's the knock on effect to the other 99% of HB's that go without incidence or intervention that worries me. If an ob is successfully shown to be negligent, no one is going to call for all ob's to be banned from the birth area. I just hope it can be seen for what it is - possible negligence by one middie, not the whole industry.

[MummyLip]

I agree with daddy large! There needs to be an inquest into these two births. If Lisa has done everything by the book then she has nothing to worry about.

[InBetween]

Looking at the inquest alone, sure it seems like a good idea, however combine it with, the story in this thread about the ordeal a Homebirth couple went through just because Lisa attended, the AMA policy statement, the recent counts by a high profile OB about older mums being selfish...

You obviously haven't read any of the findings or judgments in relation to this very long case. If you had, you would know that the above is a deeply flawed statement.


Homebirth won't be regulated, it will just be outlawed.

This is a fear based statement with absolutely no basis in fact and the type of drivel that promotes nonsensical thinking.

Quite frankly, I think the media coverage surrounding the inquest into the death of a child at Gold Coast hospital to be far more damning.

[DaddyLarge]

Daddylarge-do you think that these women were not warned about the risks of vbacs by other health professionals?

I have no idea. Outside of a couple of media reports and court transcripts (and I'll freely admit that I only skimmed them) I know nothing of the case. I'm sure that after the inquest I'll know more, though.

But information is a tricky thing. Hypothetically (and no, I'm not claiming that this is the case in this instance, just a possible example) it could be the case that a parent is warned by a range of doctors that some risks exist, and that certain precautions are necessary.

However, it might also be the case that for one reason or the other, the parents have sought the advice of someone who has decided to operate outside of the system and remains critical of the mainstream opinions. That person might, for whatever reason, have interests (pecuniary and otherwise) in maligning and discrediting the advice of "the system", and might be a particularly skilled salesperson - particularly to those that are naturally receptive to contrary ideas.

In such an example, it might be the case that the persuasive ability of the person critical of the system has led the parents to lend more weight to their opinion and knowledge than that of the establishment, and make their decisions accordingly.

In such an instance, the parent might have been informed of the risks, but the totality of the information and the mode of presentation of that information means that the parents have, in fact, made an uninformed decision.

Simply being told doesn't mean that one is informed. Unless the information is delivered in the most accurate and objective way possible, it can still result in uninformed decisions.

[elleandsam]

You obviously haven't read any of the findings or judgments in relation to this very long case. If you had, you would know that the above is a deeply flawed statement.



This is a fear based statement with absolutely no basis in fact and the type of drivel that promotes nonsensical thinking.

Absolutely it's ear based, if high risk homebirths go then I won't be having more children because the thought of birthing in hospital makes me want to puke.

[hopefully2]

I agree delirium. The coronial inquest will hopefully create a safe means of providing home births. I presime they are well regulated in the uk. The Nhs delivers babies at home everyday.

[mrsdj1234]

You obviously haven't read any of the findings or judgments in relation to this very long case. If you had, you would know that the above is a deeply flawed statement.



This is a fear based statement with absolutely no basis in fact and the type of drivel that promotes nonsensical thinking.

Quite frankly, I think the media coverage surrounding the inquest into the death of a child at Gold Coast hospital to be far more damning.

Yes it's total fearmongering, because the AMA haven't already convinced the government to make it illegal for a midwife to attend a homebirth without having an agreement with an OB.
If it continues to be about a homebirth and not just the midwife, I can guarantee that it will spell the end for homebirth in this country.
Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[hopefully2]

True DL- shame really. So very very sad.

[elleandsam]

Unfortunately regulating Homebirth would probably mean I'd be forced into hospital, especially as another case will probably outlaw freebirth.

[DaddyLarge]

What about the big picture though? There's another case where photos, video and eye witness evidence all say the baby was stillborn yet a coronal inquest is going ahead... Against the parents!

Looking at the inquest alone, sure it seems like a good idea, however combine it with, the story in this thread about the ordeal a Homebirth couple went through just because Lisa attended, the AMA policy statement, the recent counts by a high profile OB about older mums being selfish... Homebirth won't be regulated, it will just be outlawed.

Homebirth doesn't need more policiesx hospital policy is what drives many women to. chose Homebirth. I refuse to allow someone into my home who will the tell me when to push, when to move, and what to do.

A questionably-defined fear of future repercussions is never - and SHOULD never - be an excuse for people to escape scrutiny of their actions.

Two people died, and the circumstances are unclear. This is EXACTLY why a coroner exists, and I see nothing to fear from an inquest.

[delirium]

Unfortunately regulating Homebirth would probably mean I'd be forced into hospital, especially as another case will probably outlaw freebirth.

Hmmm, I'm not so sure. I don't support heavy regulation where HB is just an extension of ob philosophies, so a wolf in sheep's clothing so to speak. I believe the principles of low intervention, hands off birthing should still be paramount to HB. But, without accountability it's never going to be taken seriously.

What's scares me is that this could stop the hospital funded and insured HB study going on in Vic (?). This is what HB needs, tangible figures in australia as to how safe it can be.

[Farmerwife]

I have found it interesting reading this thread and seeing peoples opinions on this matter.

One thing that has got to me from all this thread & I'm going to guess it's just a manner of speak but for anyone out there reading that may be impressionable I would like to clarify birthing choice should be the parents choice. It really gets to me when a woman says it's "my body it's my choice" on the matter of anything related to reproducing, be it what to eat, how long to work, where to give birth etc. I'm sorry if this offends anyone but I just personally feel both parents need to make these decisions. I'm sorry if this makes women feel like just a vessel but at the end of the day that is FOB child inside you & he should have some say what happens. Yes there will be situations when the FOB has done something horrible & then of course it should all be up to the mother but in majority of situations there are two loving people bringing a new life into the world & it needs to be a decision those TWO make. I think it is important when discussing these situations that this is made clear.

I realize I have never had a child so I don't know what it's like to have child grow inside me so I guess we will see how I feel then but for now I just really think the mindset should be more about the parents choice not just the mothers choice as I feel it completely overshadows any fathers feelings and may lead some impressionable mothers to think they don't need to consult the FOB on anything pregnancy or birth related & it is just my opinion that they should be.

Now I suppose the attacks will begin...

[InBetween]

Well before they do, Farmerwife, let me :yelclap:

[DaddyLarge]

Damn app and tiny buttons with fat fingers.
DL, I agree with the inquest, just not with the way the media coverage is. Personally I think that such inquests should not be allowed to be reported until a finding is reached. And the way the media is going about making the point it was a homebirth midwife and not just a midwife is what will affect homebirth.

Fair enough. I disagree, though - I believe that in most cases, the public's right to follow the proceedings is paramount.

Again, I've only seen a couple of media reports into this, so I can't comment on the quality of reporting except to say that it certainly wouldn't shock me if they were sensationalist and selective with their reports. The media is as the media does and all that...

[InBetween]

Oh for heaven's sakes, you'd think by the way a select few are carrying on one would think that hospital based middies are never subjected to inquests and/or reported on. Out of the many anyone can find online, this is a recent one (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/midwife-who-wrote-false-records-over-death-may-face-criminal-charges/story-e6frg6nf-1226034327605)that hit the papers in Qld big time earlier this year.

[mrsdj1234]

Farmerwife, if my husband wasn't supportive of my choice in regards to birthing, it would mean we would have to come to a compromise. My child is his child, so it must be something that is agreed on.
My husband is my birth support and without his support I would not be able to birth the way I want.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[missie_mack]

People who have studied the field for at least eight years. Who have seen and experienced risk. Take theirs or take Lisa Barrett? Over and out.

I have been following this and just wanted to comment on this. Currently in Australia there are many many doctors and Obs who do not follow what is considered best practice. You just have to view the Cochrane Review of studies to see what is currently best practice and ask everyone to have had a certain procedure since it was produced and you will find very few people have the benefit of experiencing the current best practice. So whilst you can see a medical professional with many many years of experience that does not make them infallible- and whilst it is valid to say that this may be the case with the midwife in question, we also need to remember that she also has many many years experience. She has worked in leading hospitals and head of staff and also 'has seen and experienced risk' professionally. Just because she prefers to work with homebirth does not mean she lacks experience, talent and skills. Infact I believe she was brought to Australia due to her high level of skill and experience.

[Lillynix]

The way I see it in regards to homebirth becoming more inaccessible to women due to the current climate with Midwives, lack of insurance, collaboration with Obstetricians etc is that it *could* mean that all homebirths may be subject to the same criteria as the current hospital run homebirth programs.

Many may not see a problem with this if it is the case, but there are many women who would then be excluded from homebirth. And really, there are so many Hospitals that seem to be operating well behind the times, it's really hard to imagine them being supportive of and offering homebirth programs.

My local public hospital wouldn't even allow me to make use of the birth centre (I was considered high risk as my first ended in a c-section and I was wanting a VBAC for my second), nor would they allow me to waterbirth, not even if I were to bring my own birth pool and go through the approval process, their policy simply doesn't allow for waterbirth because, according to the Midwife I was seeing, it's far too dangerous and takes a specially trained Midwife to deliver a baby in water...

I would love nothing more than to see homebirth opened up and available for more women, but as it stands, most women chose homebirth because they feel it is the (based on research, statistics and support from their Midwives) safest option for them and their baby, and these often include women planning VBAC's (as just one example), but based on the view of most Hospital policies, and many Obstetricians, with VBAC's not routinely accepted into hospital run birthing centres, why can we hope that they would be accepted into hospital run homebirths?

[BigRedV]

I think this has received more attention than a woman who was paralyzed at a hospital when the doctor put the wrong liquid into the epidural tube.

[Lillynix]

BigRedV - Oh that story was absolutely horrendous. I felt so much for that woman and her family, it was just so horrible :(

[elleandsam]

Farmerswife - I'd like to see my DH try to tell me what to do during labour. While I value his input and take his concerns on board, ultimately I am the one going through the pain, I am the one taking the risks and at the end of the day I am the one giving birth.

I take his concerns, fears and suggestions in board, but at the end of the day it's risk to neonate and mother, not gather. In yet to hear of paternal deaths during surgical births. We're not avoiding internals or surgery for DH here.

Luckily DH and I are on the same page, we both know that apart from previous surgery that I'd be low risk and hospital intervention would hinder not help us.

[elleandsam]

I think this has received more attention than a woman who was paralyzed at a hospital when the doctor put the wrong liquid into the epidural tube.

Antiseptic instead of an epidural. Such a sad story.

[Lillynix]

Farmers Wife, it's extremely important to me that my Husband is supportive and feels comfortable with my birth plans, which is why when homebirth was first brought up by me, I went above and beyond to show him exactly how safe it is, what it would involve, what issues may arise and how they would be dealt with etc as well as meeting with my Midwife and talking with her, any preconceived fears he had were put to rest.

Ultimately though, if I really wanted to birth at home, I would, if I could not get him to support me and feel comfortable with it, it does indeed become a case of, too bad, this is my body and it is my birth and I will do whatever it takes to make sure that it goes ahead smoothly.

[Guest]

I have found it interesting reading this thread and seeing peoples opinions on this matter.

One thing that has got to me from all this thread & I'm going to guess it's just a manner of speak but for anyone out there reading that may be impressionable I would like to clarify birthing choice should be the parents choice. It really gets to me when a woman says it's "my body it's my choice" on the matter of anything related to reproducing, be it what to eat, how long to work, where to give birth etc. I'm sorry if this offends anyone but I just personally feel both parents need to make these decisions. I'm sorry if this makes women feel like just a vessel but at the end of the day that is FOB child inside you & he should have some say what happens. Yes there will be situations when the FOB has done something horrible & then of course it should all be up to the mother but in majority of situations there are two loving people bringing a new life into the world & it needs to be a decision those TWO make. I think it is important when discussing these situations that this is made clear.

I realize I have never had a child so I don't know what it's like to have child grow inside me so I guess we will see how I feel then but for now I just really think the mindset should be more about the parents choice not just the mothers choice as I feel it completely overshadows any fathers feelings and may lead some impressionable mothers to think they don't need to consult the FOB on anything pregnancy or birth related & it is just my opinion that they should be.

Now I suppose the attacks will begin...
My body doesn't belong to dh, so while my body is going through a birthing process then I do get to decide what happens to it, unless ofcourse he's the one pushing a baby through his vagina OR getting his stomach cut open, who has to deal with the pain, memory of the pain, the recovery process, the hormones, the bonding, the breastfeeding etc etc. Sorry, but no, any decision regarding my body is ultimately mine.

[elleandsam]

My body doesn't belong to dh, so while my body is going through a birthing process then I do get to decide what happens to it, unless ofcourse he's the one pushing a baby through his vagina OR getting his stomach cut open, who has to deal with the pain, memory of the pain, the recovery process, the hormones, the bonding, the breastfeeding etc etc. Sorry, but no, any decision regarding my body is ultimately mine.

^^ This.

My DH was a big part of my last birth plan and making decisions because I had a GA so for 3 hours he was the primary caregiver and we needed him to make decisions that ultimately we'd both be comfortable with. But under normal circumstances I think of it like this.

We're driving a car and I'm in the drivers seat, I'm happy to take suggestions and requests from passengers but ultimately I'm in charge.

[share a book]

I have found it interesting reading this thread and seeing peoples opinions on this matter.

One thing that has got to me from all this thread & I'm going to guess it's just a manner of speak but for anyone out there reading that may be impressionable I would like to clarify birthing choice should be the parents choice. It really gets to me when a woman says it's "my body it's my choice" on the matter of anything related to reproducing, be it what to eat, how long to work, where to give birth etc. I'm sorry if this offends anyone but I just personally feel both parents need to make these decisions. I'm sorry if this makes women feel like just a vessel but at the end of the day that is FOB child inside you & he should have some say what happens. Yes there will be situations when the FOB has done something horrible & then of course it should all be up to the mother but in majority of situations there are two loving people bringing a new life into the world & it needs to be a decision those TWO make. I think it is important when discussing these situations that this is made clear.

I realize I have never had a child so I don't know what it's like to have child grow inside me so I guess we will see how I feel then but for now I just really think the mindset should be more about the parents choice not just the mothers choice as I feel it completely overshadows any fathers feelings and may lead some impressionable mothers to think they don't need to consult the FOB on anything pregnancy or birth related & it is just my opinion that they should be.

Now I suppose the attacks will begin...

No he had NO say over how I birthed or what I ate or when I worked or how I rais e my child.

On topic however I can s ee how this can help but I can s ee how it can hind er homebirth in Aus tralia.

[IndigoJ]

My body doesn't belong to dh, so while my body is going through a birthing process then I do get to decide what happens to it, unless ofcourse he's the one pushing a baby through his vagina OR getting his stomach cut open, who has to deal with the pain, memory of the pain, the recovery process, the hormones, the bonding, the breastfeeding etc etc. Sorry, but no, any decision regarding my body is ultimately mine.

Agreed.

My DP wanted me to have a csec for my last birth as the Drs said it would do irreparable damage to me to VB, they said i couldnt do it again after my first baby. I had 2drs tell me it wasnt possible, one who said it was but it will do damage, and another who supported my push for a vb. They also said my son would be bigger than my first.

DS2 was born after 3hrs of pain. Yes i had a VB, nothing went wrong at all, i am totally back to normal, no 'irrepearable' damage. My DS2 was also smaller than my first.

So if i had of done what DP wanted, i would have an unecessary scar on my stomach, through layers of muscle and my uterus, not to mention this would have put me in the 'high risjk' catagory for my next meaning id need MORE major surgery. I respected his wishes but at the end of the day it was my body and i decided against major surgery. And lucky i did because my pain lasted 3hrs, not the 6wks of recovery, not to mention the emotional scars.

[elleandsam]

It seems you can be anti-Homebirth but you can't express that you dislike a choice but still support it.

[The sooper nanny]

If you are that high risk, the risk is not reduced by being in a hospital.
In the case of the bub with the stuck shoulder, nothing in a hospital setting would have made it less likely, except for surgery which can't happen immediately anyway, so the outcome would most likely have been the same.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

I actually disagree with this.
In the event of an emergency where I work we press a bell and a team of very experienced medical staff assist
In the case of Lisa barretts with the shoulder dystocia her hands cramped and she was not able to help the baby out, instead handed the task over to a student who had never had any training in obstetric emergencies.
If there were more experienced midwives and doctors to assist the baby may have been born sooner, time is of essence in a shoulder dystocia and this baby may have survived
We can also get to theatre in less than 5 minutes

Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[Annabella]

I think Lillynix hit the nail on the head about assessment of risk. One of the big things this inquest will probably result in as an overhaul HB regulations, which is already taking place and this will just make it worse. Who decides what is 'high risk'? The big one I can think of is VBAC, which in hospitals is considered high risk. Homebirth midwives have really high success rates with VBAC, hospitals not so much, due to all the restraints placed on the birthing mum in part because of her 'high risk' status. It would be really wrong for VBAC to be considered too high risk for ANY home birth, and for midwives to be prosecuted if they took on a VBAC client.

And things such as big babies- so many times women are told they are too small to push out their big baby, only for the baby to be born by c/s weighing less than 4kgs! And then they go on to birth a BIGGER baby vaginally. What if these women were deemed to high risk for homebirth?

The way it is going, this is what ill happen, and this case will contribute to that.

[Guest]

A vbac is not actually considered high risk, they make an extra point of uterine tear and require monitoring, this is what dr's told me during my vbac. Also when going through private hospital policies online (from a vbac website which displayed mine) the guidelines for a normal vb and first time vb to a vbac are exactly the same. At my local hospital they do the homebirth program, it's already restricted to the point of barely anyone can use it, no vbac, no first time mums, no one with any sort of 'issue' If you want a model of what private homebirth could be like look no further than the model they already have :( it's frustrating too, even though I had a perfectly normal vb 2nd time I will always be considered a vbac and would never be allowed to access the program.

[elleandsam]

What if you refuse extra monitoring though? I mean could you really had an active labour for a VBAC? Don't they require CFM?

[mrsdj1234]

I actually disagree with this.
In the event of an emergency where I work we press a bell and a team of very experienced medical staff assist
In the case of Lisa barretts with the shoulder dystocia her hands cramped and she was not able to help the baby out, instead handed the task over to a student who had never had any training in obstetric emergencies.
If there were more experienced midwives and doctors to assist the baby may have been born sooner, time is of essence in a shoulder dystocia and this baby may have survived
We can also get to theatre in less than 5 minutes

Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

At the hospital my first two were born at there were only 2 middies on at both births, and I was left to labour on my own for most of that time. DH had to get them when I told him my body was pushing.
So please don't tell me that the outcome would have been a live child when it can't be guaranteed.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

[Roopee]

What if you refuse extra monitoring though? I mean could you really had an active labour for a VBAC? Don't they require CFM?
Most hospitals and OB's will insist on CFM but it's something that a lot of VBAC mummas will refuse because NOT having an active labour can severely impede their chances of vaginal birth.

This does need to be investigated, babies died, of course it does but it does NOT need to be a witch hunt designed to show the public how 'dangerous' HB is, nor does it need to be used as a method to illustrate to women WHY they shouldn't have one.
Generally HB is considered to be a VERY safe practice.

A very dear friend of mine just free birthed her 5th baby,at home, in water and her baby was breech. There were no complications, she was not lucky, her birth was completely 'normal'.

[The sooper nanny]

At the hospital my first two were born at there were only 2 middies on at both births, and I was left to labour on my own for most of that time. DH had to get them when I told him my body was pushing.
So please don't tell me that the outcome would have been a live child when it can't be guaranteed.

Sent from my GT540 using Bubhub

I didn't say that. I'm saying that there would have been more expert hands which MAY have improved the outcome


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[elleandsam]

I didn't say that. I'm saying that there would have been more expert hands which MAY have improved the outcome


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

And it may not have too. I've pushed a buzzer in a life threatening situation in hospital before (APH) middle of the day, I could hear a couple of midwives talking outside my room minutes earlier about how bored they were, 15 minutes later....

[Guest]

What if you refuse extra monitoring though? I mean could you really had an active labour for a VBAC? Don't they require CFM?
Ofcourse you can refuse it, I did. I didn't have any monitoring the middi only used a doppler occassionaly, I also refused to canula and didn't get the injection for the placenta. I only had a midwife present, the room was dark and quiet as I requested and there wasn't anything I was refused really, my birth plan was followed to a tea and it was 3 pages long!!!

[elleandsam]

Ofcourse you can refuse it, I did. I didn't have any monitoring the middi only used a doppler occassionaly, I also refused to canula and didn't get the injection for the placenta. I only had a midwife present, the room was dark and quiet as I requested and there wasn't anything I was refused really, my birth plan was followed to a tea and it was 3 pages long!!!

Did hey give you any dramas when refusing? I refused the group b strep and got dealt the deaf baby card.

[Lillynix]

What if you refuse extra monitoring though? I mean could you really had an active labour for a VBAC? Don't they require CFM?

Going off topic here, I did refuse CFM and other interventions during my hospital VBAC, but it wasn't an easy task, if I hadn't of been as well versed on VBAC and my rights, things would have been very differently. Having that "dead baby" card pulled on you during labour, is pretty horrific stuff.

[elleandsam]

Going off topic here, I did refuse CFM and other interventions during my hospital VBAC, but it wasn't an easy task, if I hadn't of been as well versed on VBAC and my rights, things would have been very differently. Having that "dead baby" card pulled on you during labour, is pretty horrific stuff.


See this is what I want to avoid.

[Lillynix]

I withheld a fair bit of info from the Hospital when I rocked up, too ;)

I had been labouring at home for 24hrs already when we headed to the hospital, I told them i'd only been in labour for an hour, told them I wanted to make sure it was the real deal before heading in, as y'know you're supposed to rock up ASAP with a VBAC.

I refused CFM, though agreed to 2 x 15mins of the CTG, I refused a canula (though agreed in the end for some fluids as I was pretty dehydrated), I refused a foetal scalp monitor (this is when the dead baby card was pulled), I refused drugs, despite the push, I refused internals, I refused an episiotomy while I was pushing and I laboured for about 2hrs in the shower when I first arrived.

The hospital part of my labour was 8 hours and I am SO glad that I didn't turn up any earlier than I did, i'm certain I would have been pushed for a c-section if they knew how long i'd been in labour for (32hrs from start to finish).

I also refused all pre-natal testing, so no NT scan, no Glucose testing, no GBS swab and surprisingly they were totally fine with all of that, anibiotics weren't even on the card during labour, they just monitored DS1 afterwards, but I think I may have just been lucky there as I had lost my sh** at a certain midwife at one pre-natal visit ;)

[Guest]

Did hey give you any dramas when refusing? I refused the group b strep and got dealt the deaf baby card.
I hadn't felt the baby move that day at all, so I went in for monitoring because that thing freaks me out. While being monitored, my labour started. I was checked and was confirmed I was in labour, it was progressing quick so I stayed. I was taken off monitoring and walked about outside waiting for my doula and dh, then I spent the next 2 hours on the loo and the next 2 laying down with my ipod doing my meditations, the midiwfe occassionaly came and used the doppler, she never asked to put me back onto monitoring.
After 4 hours I got my labour suite, I was in transition at that time and screaming through the pain, the dr and what seemed like a few people crowded my room, they told dh they have to put the monitor on me now and the canula, dh said do what you have to do :rolleyes: Luckily my doula stepped in and made them read my birth plan, they read it, came back and insisted again, my doula said 'Ang what do you want to do?' I looked up and yelled ' NOT RIGHT NOW EVERYONE NEEDS TO LEAVE AND STOP TALKING' So they did, the room was darkened, I was left alone with the midwife (and someone in the background wasn't quite sure who) and thats it, I gave birth.
I can understand some people being felt like they're forced, but I was in the pushing stage already and had just done my whole labour without monitoring and barely a midwife present, so they didn't push it on me, I mean even if they tried I would have punched someone, you can imagine the pain I was in and so focused on pushing, as if I was going to sit still and get a canula in or get a monitor on me, it wouldn't have happened even if they tried!
One thing I would recommend a vbac and anyone really, is stay home as long as possible. I didn't get the chance to, but I also didn't spend hours and hours in the labour suite, cause once your in there, you're on their radar.

[Deserama]

Oh look I think there needs to be a big overhaul when it comes to hospital policies and I think it needs to be uniform throughout all hospitals. I believe that maybe there should be a point system or some sort of 'level' system of 'high risk' and that patients should be informed of these policies and levels before hand, and they should be informed as to where they fall.

They should be informed of the proceedures that are ideal for their particular level and they should be given a choice as to whether they wish to follow these procedures.

As for Homebirth, I believe the same. If they wish NOT to follow procedure that's fine but if something goes wrong then the onus is on THEM (both patient and midwife). And yes if that means an inquest then so be it. I think choices should be fully informed. If you want to homebirth even though you know that there are risks involved, according to the medical profession, then you should be free to do that...BUT...be fully aware of the consequences of that, and maybe even sign off on it.

[mummykitty]

Unfortunately regulating Homebirth would probably mean I'd be forced into hospital, especially as another case will probably outlaw freebirth.

How would they manage that?... Anyone can say whoops I'm sorry it all happened so fast?...

I am admittedly waiting for the results before I get too involved but it does concern me greatly that these cases are becoming more and more about homebirth as a whole and that does not bode well :gloomy:

ETA: my DP or FOB whichever is NOT the one who is carrying the child and putting their well being physically or emotionally on the line (yes I know dads can be traumatized if things go wrong but it is not on the same level as the person experiencing it all) when it is their body at risk of being torn or cut open or them facing absolute strangers forcing themselves upon them then I will hold their opinion equally. In terms of raising the child to an extent I believe they stand equal where it does not impact the mothers right to bodily autonomy (ie forcing mum to BF if she hates it) but until that child is born and is it's own little being I will ultimately make the decisions regarding health care. Personally I discuss and try to make sure we are both informed but it is my body and my choice.

[V8]

Oh look I think there needs to be a big overhaul when it comes to hospital policies and I think it needs to be uniform throughout all hospitals. I believe that maybe there should be a point system or some sort of 'level' system of 'high risk' and that patients should be informed of these policies and levels before hand, and they should be informed as to where they fall.

They should be informed of the proceedures that are ideal for their particular level and they should be given a choice as to whether they wish to follow these procedures.

As for Homebirth, I believe the same. If they wish NOT to follow procedure that's fine but if something goes wrong then the onus is on THEM (both patient and midwife). And yes if that means an inquest then so be it. I think choices should be fully informed. If you want to homebirth even though you know that there are risks involved, according to the medical profession, then you should be free to do that...BUT...be fully aware of the consequences of that, and maybe even sign off on it.

Yep, i'd have to say i pretty much agree with that. As long as informed decisions are made at hospital and at a homebirth about risks, i think the onus is on the consumer (i.e the woman birthing) to decide what she will and won't consent to.

[elleandsam]

Yep, i'd have to say i pretty much agree with that. As long as informed decisions are made at hospital and at a homebirth about risks, i think the onus is on the consumer (i.e the woman birthing) to decide what she will and won't consent to.

And that's exactly what should happen, women should be in control and able to make those decisions without fear mongering.

[Deserama]

As long as everything is uniform and there is understanding of the level of risk. That way there's no issues with this OB believes this and that OB believes that and this middie thinks this and that hospital has that policy but this one doesn't....One set of policy throughout!!! And the weigh up of the level of risk should be available to all patients..

For instance take me for example...if I were pregnant now it would be my 7th but that would make me 'high risk' because of the number of babies I've had. So say...that could be level 5 risk factor.

The fact that I've had 6 previous natural births should bring be back to level 3.

The fact that I've had 1 severe PPH after birth should bring MY risk back to level 5...(baby's risk, still level 3)

The fact that I've had yet another PPH (not as servere) should bring it to level 7.

The fact that I've gone on to have 3 more children incident free should bring me back down to level 5.

And so on and so forth.

Same with something like blood pressure...how high is this blood pressure problem, were there any other symptoms, was it ongoing? Previous history of BP probs etc

Diabetes - how well are you handling your diabetes, weight gain etc

Big babies - how big are you? How big is your pelvis? How big would your pelvis stretch...could different positions lower your risk factor?

So many things! So when I here OBs say "high risk" so many questions come to my mind....how high risk? to me? to the baby? the likelihood of things going wrong....could certain interventions increase this risk level.

We simply do not have enough information given to us and we have so many conflicting information too! No wonder people want to defy the 'establishment' and have a homebirth! Why in the world would you want to give birth in a place where there are so many ridiculous policies and procedures that have no relevance to our health??

[anewme]

Oh look I think there needs to be a big overhaul when it comes to hospital policies and I think it needs to be uniform throughout all hospitals. I believe that maybe there should be a point system or some sort of 'level' system of 'high risk' and that patients should be informed of these policies and levels before hand, and they should be informed as to where they fall.

They should be informed of the proceedures that are ideal for their particular level and they should be given a choice as to whether they wish to follow these procedures.

As for Homebirth, I believe the same. If they wish NOT to follow procedure that's fine but if something goes wrong then the onus is on THEM (both patient and midwife). And yes if that means an inquest then so be it. I think choices should be fully informed. If you want to homebirth even though you know that there are risks involved, according to the medical profession, then you should be free to do that...BUT...be fully aware of the consequences of that, and maybe even sign off on it.


As long as everything is uniform and there is understanding of the level of risk. That way there's no issues with this OB believes this and that OB believes that and this middie thinks this and that hospital has that policy but this one doesn't....One set of policy throughout!!! And the weigh up of the level of risk should be available to all patients..

For instance take me for example...if I were pregnant now it would be my 7th but that would make me 'high risk' because of the number of babies I've had. So say...that could be level 5 risk factor.

The fact that I've had 6 previous natural births should bring be back to level 3.

The fact that I've had 1 severe PPH after birth should bring MY risk back to level 5...(baby's risk, still level 3)

The fact that I've had yet another PPH (not as servere) should bring it to level 7.

The fact that I've gone on to have 3 more children incident free should bring me back down to level 5.

And so on and so forth.

Same with something like blood pressure...how high is this blood pressure problem, were there any other symptoms, was it ongoing? Previous history of BP probs etc

Diabetes - how well are you handling your diabetes, weight gain etc

Big babies - how big are you? How big is your pelvis? How big would your pelvis stretch...could different positions lower your risk factor?

So many things! So when I here OBs say "high risk" so many questions come to my mind....how high risk? to me? to the baby? the likelihood of things going wrong....could certain interventions increase this risk level.

We simply do not have enough information given to us and we have so many conflicting information too! No wonder people want to defy the 'establishment' and have a homebirth! Why in the world would you want to give birth in a place where there are so many ridiculous policies and procedures that have no relevance to our health??



I agree. Well said

[mummykitty]

I agree. Well said

:iagree: :yelclap: :yes:

[The sooper nanny]

If we are talking risk then yes this is my point with Lisa
Preterm
Twins
Breech
Seriously ?? What is she thinking ???
This is just stupidly unsafe and she will continue to have poor outcomes as these births should occur in a hospital with appropriate equipment and resources


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[Deserama]

The sooper nanny
If we are talking risk then yes this is my point with Lisa
Preterm
Twins
Breech
Seriously ?? What is she thinking ???
This is just stupidly unsafe and she will continue to have poor outcomes as these births should occur in a hospital with appropriate equipment and resources




But see this is what's debatable and this is why there should be a level of risk factor. You say preterm is a risk factor...ok...how early? 36 weeks gestation is classed as prem yet some could argue that 36 weeks is an acceptable gestation to take such a 'risk' with if you have certain measures in place.

You say twins are a risk....again...what level? Have they given birth before? what position are these twins...what position poses the greatest risk?

Breech - is it frank or footling? Facing which way? Previous successful births? Some may argue that the level of risk is quite low compared to a posterior footling breech to a first time birther.

And with all information considered if the birther decides that the level of risk is acceptable enough to attempt a homebirth...then if there are midwives willing to facilitate this then they should be prepared to be held accountable if something goes wrong (as what's happening) furthermore the parents should also be prepared to be held accountable.

[elleandsam]

If we are talking risk then yes this is my point with Lisa
Preterm
Twins
Breech
Seriously ?? What is she thinking ???
This is just stupidly unsafe and she will continue to have poor outcomes as these births should occur in a hospital with appropriate equipment and resources


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

Twins are not stupidly unsafe, many women give birth to breech babies vaginally.

Besides who should make the final call? The woman should! No one is going to tell me that I must birth in a hospital or else because of the 'risk.' In the end it's my body and my choice. My right to bodily autonomy has not gone on holiday the minute I begin gestating. No one is marching around the streets telling everyone with a cold that they must go to the GP and they must be antibiotics.

By all means women should be told all the risks, of both home AND hospital birth. And then the choice should be with them. AND they should have the right to access the care of an IM should they accept that risk. Maybe they'd have to sign paperwork to say they accept that risk, if it meant I could birth at home I'd sign every page of a book as long as War and Peace.

[Deserama]

Maybe they'd have to sign paperwork to say they accept that risk, if it meant I could birth at home I'd sign every page of a book as long as War and Peace.

Yeh this is what I'm thinking and that would go for homebirthers as well as hospital birthers who wish to still give birth in an environment they feel is 'safer' but they wish to give birth THEIR WAY. Might make a few mum feel less threatened by hospital if they knew that ALL their wishes will be respected and that they aren't going to fall victim of a cascade of intervention just because they are considered 'high risk'.

[elleandsam]

Yeh this is what I'm thinking and that would go for homebirthers as well as hospital birthers who wish to still give birth in an environment they feel is 'safer' but they wish to give birth THEIR WAY. Might make a few mum feel less threatened by hospital if they knew that ALL their wishes will be respected and that they aren't going to fall victim of a cascade of intervention just because they are considered 'high risk'.

As long as they don't try and shove it in my face mid-contraction! :hair:

[Maybelline]

All I can say ..I am so happy I had my breech girl in hospital!!!!! Sometimes.. even if the mother is wanting to birth natural/at home..it's far safer for that unborn baby to be born in a hospital!! Regardless of how you may want your birthing experience!!!!

[The sooper nanny]

Twins are not stupidly unsafe, many women give birth to breech babies vaginally.

Besides who should make the final call? The woman should! No one is going to tell me that I must birth in a hospital or else because of the 'risk.' In the end it's my body and my choice. My right to bodily autonomy has not gone on holiday the minute I begin gestating. No one is marching around the streets telling everyone with a cold that they must go to the GP and they must be antibiotics.

By all means women should be told all the risks, of both home AND hospital birth. And then the choice should be with them. AND they should have the right to access the care of an IM should they accept that risk. Maybe they'd have to sign paperwork to say they accept that risk, if it meant I could birth at home I'd sign every page of a book as long as War and Peace.

Not taking antibiotics For a cold doesn't have the same outcome as not taking medical advice and putting your child at risk of death


I have seen some very tragic outcomes in my job, things that should never have happened... One of them being a breech that died

By preterm I mean preterm- less than 37 weeks completed gestation

Lisa should not be caring for these women at home, period
I'm clearly not going to agree with you, nor you with me. But like I said, I've seen it and the consequences of these births and it makes me incredibly sad

Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[The sooper nanny]

All I can say ..I am so happy I had my breech girl in hospital!!!!! Sometimes.. even if the mother is wanting to birth natural/at home..it's far safer for that unborn baby to be born in a hospital!! Regardless of how you may want your birthing experience!!!!

Thankyou my point exactly


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[elleandsam]

Not taking antibiotics For a cold doesn't have the same outcome as not taking medical advice and putting your child at risk of death


I have seen some very tragic outcomes in my job, things that should never have happened... One of them being a breech that died

By preterm I mean preterm- less than 37 weeks completed gestation

Lisa should not be caring for these women at home, period
I'm clearly not going to agree with you, nor you with me. But like I said, I've seen it and the consequences of these births and it makes me incredibly sad

Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

And I've seen terrible things happen to my own child at the hands of so called professionals and I will hear the effects of their mistakes every single time he opens his mouth to speak.

As long as I have a well positioned then I'll be avoiding hospital. You might think too much can go wrong at home, I think the same of hospital. Hospitals are for sick people.

[The sooper nanny]

And I've seen terrible things happen to my own child at the hands of so called professionals and I will hear the effects of their mistakes every single time he opens his mouth to speak.

As long as I have a well positioned then I'll be avoiding hospital. You might think too much can go wrong at home, I think the same of hospital. Hospitals are for sick people.

Good luck to you then


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[elleandsam]

Of course we're not going to agree, I believe in birth choices regardless of whether or not I agree with the choice because bodily autonomy is a human rights issue. And it seems you only agree with choices if they fit your idea of what is an acceptable way for women to birth because it is ob so risky.

How did the human race survive pre-hospitals? :freakingout:

[The sooper nanny]

Of course we're not going to agree, I believe in birth choices regardless of whether or not I agree with the choice because bodily autonomy is a human rights issue. And it seems you only agree with choices if they fit your idea of what is an acceptable way for women to birth because it is ob so risky.

How did the human race survive pre-hospitals? :freakingout:

So you put body autonomy over your Childs wellbeing? I'm sorry I don't get that

Like I said I support homebirth but in a safe way, with medical intervention when necessary
This thread is about a particular person that I don't believe is practicing safely... That is my opinion



Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[elleandsam]

So you put body autonomy over your Childs wellbeing? I'm sorry I don't get that

Like I said I support homebirth but in a safe way, with medical intervention when necessary
This thread is about a particular person that I don't believe is practicing safely... That is my opinion



Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

No I don't, hence why when I started heavily bleeding at 27 weeks when I was planning a homebirth I got my butt to hospital, stayed there for 8 weeks and then had a csection under a general. Faced my worst fear (needles) every 3 days to have blood group on hold.

But knowing the risks I believe that the risk of negative outcomes in hospital (separation at birth, exposure to drugs, chances of surgery which has other risks associated like 3 times higher maternal death rate etc etc) then at home.

Don't assume I would risk my child for a birth experience, I've gone through birth trauma for my son and would again and again and again.

[brogeybear]

Why am I back in here?! :freakingout:

Oh for crying out loud! Your opinion of a child's wellbeing is not the only one. And for what I *wish* would be the last time, NO ONE CARES MORE ABOUT THE WELLBEING OF MY BABY THAN ME, and I would hedge my bets that is the case with the overwhelming majority of mothers. Simply because they disagree with your 'sooper' opinions does not mean they are putting their wants before their babies wellbeing!!

I do not agree with smoking during pregnancy, and I don't think anyone would argue that it is safe, even those who do it; however I, nor anyone else, do not have the right to dictate to a woman what she does with her own body, simply because she is carrying a foetus! The fact that a woman refuses to quit, cannot quit, doesn't want to quit, whatever, doesn't mean that she doesn't care about her baby; but no one can deny that every cigarette is doing the baby harm. It is still her body, her choice.

I am outraged that you dare to call yourself a midwife, when you are clearly the last person who would truly stand WITH WOMAN, which is actually what midwife means!

You do not have to believe that Lisa is practicing safely, but you are a complete and utter fraud to present yourself as a person who supports women when your sentiments are so clearly anti woman.
Your signature says it all "I help babies out", well that is part of what a midwife should be doing, her primary role should be to stand WITH THE WOMAN!!!

[The sooper nanny]

No I don't, hence why when I started heavily bleeding at 27 weeks when I was planning a homebirth I got my butt to hospital, stayed there for 8 weeks and then had a csection under a general. Faced my worst fear (needles) every 3 days to have blood group on hold.

But knowing the risks I believe that the risk of negative outcomes in hospital (separation at birth, exposure to drugs, chances of surgery which has other risks associated like 3 times higher maternal death rate etc etc) then at home.

Don't assume I would risk my child for a birth experience, I've gone through birth trauma for my son and would again and again and again.

Fair enough I'm not assuming anything
I've said what I wanted to say about this case, this is getting way too personal and off topic
I'll be leaving this thread


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[The sooper nanny]

Why am I back in here?! :freakingout:

Oh for crying out loud! Your opinion of a child's wellbeing is not the only one. And for what I *wish* would be the last time, NO ONE CARES MORE ABOUT THE WELLBEING OF MY BABY THAN ME, and I would hedge my bets that is the case with the overwhelming majority of mothers. Simply because they disagree with your 'sooper' opinions does not mean they are putting their wants before their babies wellbeing!!

I do not agree with smoking during pregnancy, and I don't think anyone would argue that it is safe, even those who do it; however I, nor anyone else, do not have the right to dictate to a woman what she does with her own body, simply because she is carrying a foetus! The fact that a woman refuses to quit, cannot quit, doesn't want to quit, whatever, doesn't mean that she doesn't care about her baby; but no one can deny that every cigarette is doing the baby harm. It is still her body, her choice.

I am outraged that you dare to call yourself a midwife, when you are clearly the last person who would truly stand WITH WOMAN, which is actually what midwife means!

You do not have to believe that Lisa is practicing safely, but you are a complete and utter fraud to present yourself as a person who supports women when your sentiments are so clearly anti woman.
Your signature says it all "I help babies out", well that is part of what a midwife should be doing, her primary role should be to stand WITH THE WOMAN!!!

Hey man don't be nasty
You do not know anything about me
Don't be so darn rude and how dare you question how I do my job I AM a midwife and I have supported many many women
I'm leaving it there


Sent from my iPhone using Bub Hub

[hopefully2]

Why am I back in here?! :freakingout:

Oh for crying out loud! Your opinion of a child's wellbeing is not the only one. And for what I *wish* would be the last time, NO ONE CARES MORE ABOUT THE WELLBEING OF MY BABY THAN ME, and I would hedge my bets that is the case with the overwhelming majority of mothers. Simply because they disagree with your 'sooper' opinions does not mean they are putting their wants before their babies wellbeing!!

I do not agree with smoking during pregnancy, and I don't think anyone would argue that it is safe, even those who do it; however I, nor anyone else, do not have the right to dictate to a woman what she does with her own body, simply because she is carrying a foetus! The fact that a woman refuses to quit, cannot quit, doesn't want to quit, whatever, doesn't mean that she doesn't care about her baby; but no one can deny that every cigarette is doing the baby harm. It is still her body, her choice.

I am outraged that you dare to call yourself a midwife, when you are clearly the last person who would truly stand WITH WOMAN, which is actually what midwife means!

You do not have to believe that Lisa is practicing safely, but you are a complete and utter fraud to present yourself as a person who supports women when your sentiments are so clearly anti woman.
Your signature says it all "I help babies out", well that is part of what a midwife should be doing, her primary role should be to stand WITH THE WOMAN!!!

Omg how on earth could you be do rude. The sooper nanny I would have you by my side protecting me and my baby any day. You obviously see that life is not open and shut.

Ever considered elleandsam you may not have your son without the hospital system.

Let the coroners findings come in already.

It is a shame that people have to attack.

Sooper nanny- give your attention and expertise to those that are actually open and respectful of them. Gd bless you and the work that you do to bring life into the world and preserve life.

[Nowhere]

Supper nanny does know what she is talking about she is one of the lovely ladies that saves babies life's when there is complications or they are born to early, or with malformed organs etc etc

[elleandsam]

Ivfhopeful - I am so grateful to the OB who delivered my son and saved my life, he is a specialist high risk OB who deals exclusively with placenta issues. He treated me with the utmost respect and left every decision ultimately in my hands.

The aneasthist who understood my fears and bent the rules so DH could hold my hand through what was the single most terrifying moment of my life was an absolute saint.

There were several midwives who treated me with kindness and respect.

There were several who didn't and nurses in NICU who put my son at risk. I'm not thankful that we had that experience.

When real complications arise then hospital is the best place, but if you don't need to be there then you should have the choice not to be.

I love my son more then life itself, how dare you insinuate any differently.

[veve]

annnnnnddd its now closed.

Thanks to all who posted politely .. and constructively.

Regards
Jenny