Homebirth controversy

anncoates · 01-08-2013 12:29PM

The births of my 2 children ended up being extremely risky, for different reasons and I'm really grateful that they and my wife had immediate access to expert care.

I personally would never opt for home birth (if it was my choice) and would like to be as near to expert care as possible.

To want a home birth even when advised not to is pretty dumb. .

kowloon · 01-08-2013 12:34PM

Lando Griffin wrote: »

...I had to throw away a perfectly good sambo.
Baby started to get stressed so off to the operation table and an hour later a fine healthy Baby Lando:).

It should become a family custom that every year on the child's birthday you make them a sandwich and then bin it on front of them to remind them of your sacrifice :pac:.

kunst nugget · 01-08-2013 12:37PM

kowloon wrote: »

It should become a family custom that every year on the child's birthday you make them a sandwich and then bin it on front of them to remind them of your sacrifice :pac:.

If he was that hungry he could have just eaten the placenta. It's very nutritious and lovely with a bit of rocket and some balsamic drizzled on it.

anto3473 · 01-08-2013 12:38PM

Lando Griffin wrote: »

Unfortunately I had decided to grab a coffee and sandwich and when I got back she was nearly giving birth, and I had to throw away a perfectly good sambo.
.

Congrats on the baby, Sorry to hear of your sandwich loss. I know the pain all too well. I was once mugged by a seagull (they are bigger than they look), I was looking forward to my subway.

seamus · 01-08-2013 12:55PM

bluewolf wrote: »

A midwifery degree...?

Which has as much in common with obstetrics as maths does with physics - i.e. same general area, very different qualifications.
Being qualified in one does not give you expertise in the other.

Sleepy · 01-08-2013 01:00PM

Let her go ahead, once she and her husband accept that neither the midwife, the HSE, nor the state have any responsibility to pay for any complications that arise from her actions.

She should either have to provide evidence of the wealth or the private medical insurance to cover the expense of any complications that arise during her labour up to and including 24-hour care for the life expectancy of the child in the event of her death and brain damage caused to the child by those complications.

VinLieger · 01-08-2013 01:06PM

Entitled bitch

Boombastic · 01-08-2013 01:11PM

Let her have the home birth. She has been informed of the risks. Charge her with murder if the baby doesn't survive.

SEPT 23 1989 · 01-08-2013 01:17PM

Boombastic wrote: »

Let her have the home birth. She has been informed of the risks. Charge her with murder if the baby doesn't survive.

Firm but fair

seamus · 01-08-2013 01:19PM

Sleepy wrote: »

She should either have to provide evidence of the wealth or the private medical insurance to cover the expense of any complications that arise during her labour up to and including 24-hour care for the life expectancy of the child in the event of her death and brain damage caused to the child by those complications.

Possibly the only valid point of her case is the debate around whether or not the individual has the right to choose the course of their treatment, regardless of the clinical guidelines or best practice.

In this case, she can't go privately. In order to practice as a midwife, the person needs to be HSE-registered. If they're not HSE registered, they will break the law if they practice as a midwife. If they act outside of HSE guidelines, they can lose their licence to practice and in some cases face prosecution.

So there is no way for this woman to obtain a midwife for the kind of birth she wants.

This opens up a debate as to whether that's a good thing. On the one hand you have the "knock yourself out" argument where if someone wants their eyeballs removed for no good reason, they should be allowed do that and pay for it. But the flipside of that argument is that if a doctor is willing to do that, then he shouldn't be allowed practice medicine at all, and allowing an "anything goes" policy in relation to private medical services can lead to serious deaths and injuries.

It's effectively a good of society -v- rights of the individual debate.

It's complicated more in this woman's case because there's a baby in the mix too, which is why I'd be far more leaning towards the HSE's side this time.

conorhal · 01-08-2013 01:20PM

Ms2011 wrote: »

Not completely the same thing but I had a section on my first & because of this I won't be able avail of the midwife led scheme if I have a second pregnancy(although I would choose to give birth in hospital) which really upsets me as I had it on my first & felt really comfortable & reassured through out my pregnancy. I found consultant led care to be more pushy & listened to less.
Someone else dictating such a personal choice can be frustrating, a mother being comfortable with her choice of birth can play a major part on how the labour goes I feel. The more happy & content the mother the better the outcome imo.

Awww, she's upset, we'd better let her endanger both her life and the babies, because we wouldn't want her upset after all!

Her 'upset' has no rational basis and thus it should be ignored. Why should illogical upset trump sensible policy?

This pretty much underlines everything that's wrong with this case, a narcisistic society which produces individuals that blithely ignore biology, because our society has so divorced them from biology that they imagine every aspect of their lives to be a personal or lifestyle choice, and thus can't fathom the notion of anybody saying 'no' or 'imperical evidence suggests we don't support your actions', so these stupid selfish delusional people end up spluttering 'BUT IT'S MY CHOICE! HOW DARE YOU INFRINGE MY RIGHT TO DO WHATEVER I LIKE NO MATTER HOW STUPID'

conorhal · 01-08-2013 01:32PM

Sleepy wrote: »

Let her go ahead, once she and her husband accept that neither the midwife, the HSE, nor the state have any responsibility to pay for any complications that arise from her actions.

She should either have to provide evidence of the wealth or the private medical insurance to cover the expense of any complications that arise during her labour up to and including 24-hour care for the life expectancy of the child in the event of her death and brain damage caused to the child by those complications.

But that's the thing, she wants to make a bad decision and at the same time demand that the state unconditionally support that bad decision.

In the inimitable words of me dear old ma, 'go on with your good self and do it if you like, but don't come running home to me when it all goes horribly wrong..'

Murt10 · 01-08-2013 01:51PM

mikom wrote: »

Fast forward a few months.........

"Aja Teehan is currently sueing the state because an ambulance was slow to get to her house"

Not beyond the realms of possibility.

Or maybe Aja Teehan sueing the state because they built the hospital too far from her house.

Morag · 01-08-2013 02:52PM

seamus wrote: »

Since when are midwives qualified to make this decision? My experience of being the man in the pregnancy thing is that they're really good at the part about getting the baby out, but for everything else midwives can be hit-or-miss, often full of superstition and strong personal opinions. I would absolutely not trust a midwife to make a call on whether my wife is suitable for hbac. Her opinion would be based almost entirely on her personal experience and not on clinical research.

I've no issue with homebirths and I can totally understand the reasons behind it in many cases. But often I get the feeling that the goal of the homebirth is to make the woman feel better about it, it's not done with the baby's wellbeing at the forefront.

There is a difference between community midwives and those who work the production lines which our maternity units and hospitals have become.

Morag · 01-08-2013 02:54PM

General General wrote: »

Ireland needs more midwife-led/managed birth centers/centres.

I think the odour of entitlement often reeks to those who either don't want that entitlement or cannot qualify for it & it'd be a lot more fragrant tomorrow to any of those who found sudden benefit.

HSE have an obligation, I'm not sure what it is... but I am sure that it's possible that some would lie through their teeth about what it is, trying to save money that they've effectively already ear-marked for some bullsh!t or other.

Let the judge decide... that's all any of us can do.

The HSE also gets a lot more money for hospital births, esp from those who have health insurance as many women are want to take it out as part of planning to have a family as it gives them more options an cover.

Morag · 01-08-2013 02:56PM

Sleepy wrote: »

Let her go ahead, once she and her husband accept that neither the midwife, the HSE, nor the state have any responsibility to pay for any complications that arise from her actions.

Can't happen when a midwife who attends a birth outside of the MUO guidelines can face a criminal prosecution with jail time and up to 60,000 euro fine.

Sleepy · 01-08-2013 02:58PM

seamus wrote: »

Possibly the only valid point of her case is the debate around whether or not the individual has the right to choose the course of their treatment, regardless of the clinical guidelines or best practice.

In this case, she can't go privately. In order to practice as a midwife, the person needs to be HSE-registered. If they're not HSE registered, they will break the law if they practice as a midwife. If they act outside of HSE guidelines, they can lose their licence to practice and in some cases face prosecution.

So there is no way for this woman to obtain a midwife for the kind of birth she wants.

This opens up a debate as to whether that's a good thing. On the one hand you have the "knock yourself out" argument where if someone wants their eyeballs removed for no good reason, they should be allowed do that and pay for it. But the flipside of that argument is that if a doctor is willing to do that, then he shouldn't be allowed practice medicine at all, and allowing an "anything goes" policy in relation to private medical services can lead to serious deaths and injuries.

It's effectively a good of society -v- rights of the individual debate.

It's complicated more in this woman's case because there's a baby in the mix too, which is why I'd be far more leaning towards the HSE's side this time.

I'd be of the opinion that idiots should be allowed to remove themselves from the gene pool.

While I'd be on the HSE's side too, in that I'd agree that there's no way they can accept any responsibility if she acts against their best medical advice, I'd have no problem with her going ahead with a home birth without one of their sanctioned midwives, or with a private midwife who's indemnified against any legal retribution for her client's stupidity. i.e. if she can find someone to act in this capacity, she should be allowed to hire them once she's prepared to indemnify them against any civil legal actions in advance of the birth. Let's face it, a qualified but silly midwife is better than no midwife at all.

conorhal wrote: »

But that's the thing, she wants to make a bad decision and at the same time demand that the state unconditionally support that bad decision.

In the inimitable words of me dear old ma, 'go on with your good self and do it if you like, but don't come running home to me when it all goes horribly wrong..'

That's pretty much what I'm saying. She should have the right to do it but no right to blame anyone else if or when the results of her decisions occur.

Sleepy · 01-08-2013 03:00PM

Morag wrote: »

Can't happen when a midwife who attends a birth outside of the MUO guidelines can face a criminal prosecution with jail time and up to 60,000 euro fine.

Ah, I didn't realise that it was actually a criminal offence for a midwife to do this. I thought it was just one of those areas that to do so would leave them insanely exposed to civil law if/when things went wrong. I.e. I didn't realise it was actual "criminal" negligence.

The moron in question hasn't a leg to stand on so. Let her hire a witch-doctor to deliver for her at home instead of asking others to risk their livelihood to make her life a little more comfortable.

Morag · 01-08-2013 03:03PM

Sleepy wrote: »

Ah, I didn't realise that it was actually a criminal offence for a midwife to do this. I thought it was just one of those areas that to do so would leave them insanely exposed to civil law if/when things went wrong. I.e. I didn't realise it was actual "criminal" negligence.

The moron in question hasn't a leg to stand on so. Let her hire a witch-doctor to deliver for her at home instead of asking others to risk their livelihood to make her life a little more comfortable.

The guidelines only changed in 2008 up until then she would have had a HBAC with the midwife of her choice. So she is challenging it as is her right to do so.

01-08-2013 03:08PM

Her actions and preferences will probably have no consequences if she goes ahead, in which case she'll feel vindicated and that'll encourage other reckless parents to put their preferences before the safety of the voiceless child.

If things go very wrong, not only does she risk her life, as she's every right to do if she wants, but puts her innocent child in the position of possibly incalculable damage or death. Doubtless she'll blame the stress of pushing for her rights.

I'm sure a home birth is a wonderful experience for the vast majority. But if I was giving birth it would be in a major hospital with a special care unit in case my infant needed immediate specialist care for any reason. That would be my first responsible decision as a parent. Why any parent would decide not to cover this possible eventuality is a complete mystery to me.

Qualitymark · 01-08-2013 03:10PM

What's needed is more information on when it's safe and when it's risky - there isn't a lot of help for mothers to calculate that risk.
I also suspect that a lot of people would choose a hospital birth if it wasn't clinical and disempowering but was homelike and mother-centred. Hospitals too often treat women in childbirth as if they're a passive thing to be worked on until a baby comes out.

Morag · 01-08-2013 03:14PM

Candie wrote: »

Her actions and preferences will probably have no consequences if she goes ahead, in which case she'll feel vindicated and that'll encourage other reckless parents to put their preferences before the safety of the voiceless child.

If things go very wrong, not only does she risk her life, as she's every right to do if she wants, but puts her innocent child in the position of possibly incalculable damage or death. Doubtless she'll blame the stress of pushing for her rights.

I'm sure a home birth is a wonderful experience for the vast majority. But if I was giving birth it would be in a major hospital with a special care unit in case my infant needed immediate specialist care for any reason. That would be my first responsible decision as a parent. Why any parent would decide not to cover this possible eventuality is a complete mystery to me.

She has planned to be 10 mins from the maternity unit in Killkenny

01-08-2013 03:15PM

Qualitymark wrote: »

What's needed is more information on when it's safe and when it's risky - there isn't a lot of help for mothers to calculate that risk.
I also suspect that a lot of people would choose a hospital birth if it wasn't clinical and disempowering but was homelike and mother-centred. Hospitals too often treat women in childbirth as if they're a passive thing to be worked on until a baby comes out.

I certainly agree that no one should be treated like a piece of meat on a conveyor belt.

But surely bringing a newly born child into the world with no specialist care available during that first vulnerable few minutes/hour is inherently risky?

What people are surely talking about here is preference, the preference of the mother. It's pretty obvious to me that having all the help the baby might need available is in the best interest of the child, and that must supersede any maternal preference.

Its another individuals life and health at risk, homelike surroundings shouldn't take priority.

01-08-2013 03:16PM

Morag wrote: »

She has planned to be 10 mins from the maternity unit in Killkenny

Could be 9 minutes too late.

Akrasia · 01-08-2013 03:22PM

The number 1 priority of the maternity services should be the safe delivery of healthy babies and looking after the health and well being of the mother.

Once these can be accomplished then of course they should try to make the mothers experience as positive as possible, but, putting the mothers experience of birth ahead of her own safety or the safety of the baby is just silly.

The most positive birthing experiences are when the baby is born healthy and the mother recovers fully. It doesn't matter how it happens, naturally, with an epidural, without an epidural, under full anesthetic if necessary, the first priority should be the safety of the mother and child.

Morag · 01-08-2013 03:29PM

Candie wrote: »

Could be 9 minutes too late.

My grandmother's were a lot further away and yet they managed between them to have 16 kids who were born at home.

guppy · 01-08-2013 03:31PM

Candie wrote: »

Could be 9 minutes too late.

And unless she means they'll all bundle into a car, 10 minutes from the hospital is really 20 minutes (even that's unrealistic) by the time the ambulance drive to her and then back again. Assuming there's an ambulance ready to go to that call-out of course. Or is it a case that one should be sitting outside her house waiting, just in case?

01-08-2013 03:31PM

Morag wrote: »

My grandmother's were a lot further away and yet they managed between them to have 16 kids who were born at home.

And I'm sure they know of awful tragedies that happened their friends and neighbours babies due to lack of immediate medical care. A few anecdotes do not constitute evidence of it's safety.

If it was all about the mother, I'd say go for it, let her do what she wants.

But it isn't.

Ms2011 · 01-08-2013 03:47PM

Akrasia wrote: »

The most positive birthing experiences are when the baby is born healthy and the mother recovers fully. It doesn't matter how it happens, naturally, with an epidural, without an epidural, under full anesthetic if necessary, the first priority should be the safety of the mother and child.

Really? I disagree to a point. I had a great pregnancy & was looking forward to a natural birth, after a failed induction I ended up with an emergancy section. I can't tell you what a knock to my confidence that was even to the point where I felt like too much of a failure to breast feed.
Everyone's attitude was 'you should be grateful you have a healthy child' & don't get me wrong I'll be eternally grateful for that. But in hindsight I had no idea how the birth would effect me even now nearly a year & a half on.

josip · 01-08-2013 03:48PM

Morag wrote: »

My grandmother's were a lot further away and yet they managed between them to have 16 kids who were born at home.

Isn't it amazing how everyone alive today managed to survive birth in all sorts of primitive conditions...

Homebirth controversy

Comments