Ricki Lake Fires Back in Debate on Home Birth

Birth in hospitals

The medical community cannot make anyone give birth in a hospital,

It's a recommendation, not a law. So if you want to have your baby at home do it.

If you don't want pain medication don't take it. And if you're smart you'll make sure the midwife you choose has privileges at your local hospital so if God forbid you do need to come to the evil hospital you can begrudgingly accept our help. Please stop demonizing physicians and nurse who work day in and out to ensure health and safety for their patients.

Why is an 'experience' worth the risk?

I am a Labor and Delivery RN. Today a patient came in with a Lay midwife following behind. No one called to tell us they were coming and the patient had not seen our Certified Nurse Midwife since about 28 weeks. The lay midwife said they came in because she thought the baby's heartrate might be 'a little low'. After trying to find the baby's heartrate, an US was done and confirmed an intrauterine fetal death. The baby was perfect and appeared to have died about 2-4 hours previous (according to pathologist). What I will NEVER understand is why the experience of homebirth is worth this risk. This woman could have had a medication, intervention free labor in a hospital. Yes, she would have not been at home but tell me, why is it worth the risk? I am absolutely unable to understand how a lay midwife could not tell that the babies heartrate was not there or that she was listening to the mothers heartrate for 2-4 hours. She should be held accountable.

Gosh - does anyone advocating hospital birth for all actually care about the way these children are brought into the world? I'm not talking "they're alive, ergo the delivery was fine" - I'm asking what the quality of life is for the child in those first, very precious few minutes?

We seem to base many decisions in hospital on "quality of life", do we not? I can think of some life and death decisions made on those bases, but not decisions relating to the introduction of a new life into the world.

I seem to remember evidence is mounting as to the effects of those first few minutes on the child as a whole - in times stretching out from infancy to adulthood. The evidence would seem to point to the fact that the first few moments of life - the "business of being born" for the baby actually has some pretty profound effects on bonding, behavior and all sorts of other aspects of development.

The woman giving birth - the mother - what is her quality of life during delivery? Why is it that so many women chose epidural over natural delivery? You can say "well, because it hurts" - but it has been proven time and again that mindset and support is a HUGE influence on a laboring mother's experience of birth and the strong feelings that come with it - which can be interpreted a number of different ways - not just as pain.

So, what I am saying is, from a moral standpoint, is it better to simply take the baby in a clinical setting, greatly increasing the risk of life altering negative experiences for mother and baby for the sake of making sure both turn out alive - or is it better to let them both have the birth that nature intended: a beautiful, natural birth that is gentle and wonderful and right? Even if infant deaths are "three times as high" in home than hospital births - you can NOT use that as a valid pedestal to stand upon, because that's still an awfully low percentage of babies born overall - I mean come on, I've seen the figures and it's not exactly as though we're losing even 1 or 2% of babies born at home! I'd see your point if it were, say, 15%.

Nevertheless, to me, from a moral standpoint I cannot see that intervening and making birth traumatic for mother and baby can be "right" based on the mostly flawed statistics and medical data you can throw at me. I will be giving birth at home, in a relaxed and real environment. I am not afraid - I am empowered and perfectly capable of giving birth, because I am just a regular human female.

Home birth

I had my baby at a waterbirth center by the care of midwives, and I would have not had it any other way except maybe at home. My water broke, contractions started, and my son was born 52 hours later. When he was born into the birthing tub, he could only be put on my stomach, his cord was so short. So he had needed that time to stretch the cord out. My birth was uncomplicated, he was incredibly healthy, as was I. It was the most amazing experience, however, I know that if I had gone to a hospital, they would have done a c-section because of how long it was taking. I don't have a doubt in my mind. Would that have been unnecessary? Yes. Absolutely. The majority of the time, our bodies know what they are doing, and they know how to make and deliver babies. Just let nature take its course, and the majority of the time, you will have a sweet, wonderful, moving experience. I would recommend midwives and an out of hospital birth to everyone who did not have complications. Of course there are risks. There are risks in everything. I'd much rather trust a midwife who is doing something they are truly passionate about. My midwives were with me every minute, and even fell asleep between my contractions, when I did.

I recommend everyone who is passionate about this subject in either direction should watch "The Business of Being Born". I saw it when I was pregnant and it really was eye opening.

Hospitals are Yucky

A close friend of mine had horrible pregnancies. Both pregnancies resulted in the delivery of pre-term neonates who are now healthy and growing. Both were delivered by C-section. The second delivery occurred after 10 days in the hospital despite the mom's request to be discharged to bed rest at home. Her recovery was complicated by a staph infection in her incision and a UTI. Five antibiotics were given to her in the month following the delivery. Bottom line, hospitals are germy, nasty places and insurers are going to stop paying for treatment received for health issues created by the hospital. The responsibility will fall on the hospital itself to pay for medical and medicinal treatments needed to clear up any infections they caused.

I plan to get pregnant in the next two years and will seriously be considering delivering at home. I'm not saying my home is germ free, but at least they are my germs and not the germs of strangers. And I work in a hospital-these fears are real.

Birth Rape

With birth rape survivors speaking out about the atrocities committed against women and babies in ever growing numbers, attendants are back pedaling, fast, to preserve their control over the birth process by attempting to force women to deliver exclusively in hospitals. We are talking about power here folks, not safety. If birth attendants were REALLY concerned about positive outcomes for the maternal-fetal dyad, there would be no instances of forced unnecessary intervention. Daylight obstetrics? Fraud and sexual assault. Death in these circumstances? Murder. If I ever serve on a jury in an instance of forced unnecessary intervention I will vote to convict- not only the perp., but any other attendants as well. Lobby all you like AMA and ACOG. The more families who experience birth rape, the more voters there will be who are calling for jail time for doctors and midwives who are assaulting mothers and babies. Politicians are politicians and are elected by VOTERS not trade unions, and they will be held accountable, and so will you!

KEEP YOUR LAWS OFF MY BODY!

It is not the choice of doctors and law makers to decide where I BIRTH MY CHILDREN. BIRTH is the work of women, this is why it is called labor; leave it to the women to decide!

The establishments are completely unethical in thinking that they may rule over a woman's potentially most profound, primal, and powerful experience.

WOMEN ARE INTELLIGENT enough to decide for themselves where to birth. It is completely contrary to evidence to assume that homebirth is unsafe. Many of the complications that arise in a hospital are created by unecessary and DANGEROUS interventions. Look at the facts. Homebirth is in fact sometimes SAFER than hospital birth.

Unfortunately most women are not informed enough to understand the complications and dangers that may arise in a hospital birth and give their power over to a doctor to have their birthing experience done to them.

I am proud to say that I birthed my daughter at home SAFELY, naturally, and powerfully without any medical intervention whatsoever with the impeccable support of two fabluous midwives and my husband!

"Dr Tuteur" or "Dr Agenda"

Before taking "Dr tuteur" seriously, check out her "blog" www.homebirthdebate.com She trashes homebirth and demands "evidence" for any claim made, while refusing to answer questions.

She may be trying to share information, but she has her own agenda as well.

Please do your OWN research, anyone can "pretend" to be a medical professional online!

Rights Perspective

This talk of safety reflects our cultural belief that birth is risky -- we're just trying to establish how risky. I think showing homebirth safe is a valid argument in its favor, but showing it unsafe is not a sufficient argument to prohibit it (which the recent AMA statement seems to be leading up to).

I think we need to consider a rights perspective. (1) People (even women!) have the right to make their own medical decisions, including the right to refuse treatment. (2) Parents have the right to make medical decisions for their children, including the right to refuse treatment. (3) We only take away a person's rights to make medical decisions after due deliberation and in extreme circumstances (such as mental illness, extreme mental retardation, and coma).

Pregnancy and labor do not automatically strip a woman of her rights as a patient or a mother. We need to be very careful in taking away these rights -- even to "protect" women and children. (Oppression has often taken place under the guise of protection). To suggest that pregnancy places a woman in the same legal status as a minor or legal incompetent is a dangerous slippery slope.

Washington again?

Please...

You cannot talk about the "washington study" because it is NOT a valid study. It compares peaches with apples. Like a woman with a premature baby that runs to a hospital and delivers a baby in a taxi is considered "ou-of-hospital birth", so... a homebirth (!!!).

This article has no validity at all...

Please, let's keep discussing the comparison between PLANNED homebirth with a skilled assistant with hospital births, both of the same group (low risk).

And let's keep in mind that safety is important, but it's not all. If that was all that matters, every american student would be prohibited to play football, because when we mortality and morbidity rates, chess is much safer.

There's much more in a birth then just to survive...

There are human and feminine values.

Ric Jones

Obstetrician - Brasil