Croakey / Croakey
Rooted / Sophie Black
The Stump / Bernard Keane
Pure Poison / Tobias Ziegler
The Content Makers / Margaret Simons
The Stump / Eva Cox
Pure Poison / Dave Gaukroger
Crikey Sports / Jarrod Kimber
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media, business, the environment and life.
Copyright © 2009 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey. All Rights Reserved.
Editor: Jonathan Green
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble
Political Correspondent: Bernard Keane
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000
Ph: 1800 985 502
Fax: (03) 8623 9975
34 Comments
Er, yes, that trade in might just possibly have something to do with deaths in childbirth and infant mortality plummeting by ninety-something percent. Not a bad deal, for mine.
Love the title…
Beautiful
I’m truly impressed that you’ve managed to keep your fury merely “dull” FD.
It seriously depressing when “medical science” becomes the new religion.
Gotta say I disagree with this one. Childbirth is one of our most marginal activities, up there with base jumping and canyoning. The number of home-births gone wrong I’ve heard of…
All the same PADDY, if you have had the misfortune to read some of the garbage written by this po-faced right-to-birthers brigade, you will realize Birthing at Home IS the new religion. All the same holier than thou attitude, people who solemnly believe they have reinvented the wheel. And the dedicated acolytes spreading the gospel. It’s quite nauseating. Trust me.
you hippy
So Mark and Richard..you dont think we midwives are capable of initiating resus and transfering when appropriate? I hate the image that at a homebirth, if something goes wrong people think we stand around exclaiming “oh Dear! There goes anotherone” FFS..we are trained to recognise and manage problems if they occur and tranfsfer to higher level specialist care if needed. By the way many babies die in hospital too..just not so newsworthy I suppose.
All those crazies wanting to give birth ‘Naturally’ - as if such a thing were ever good for you.
I say foreceps, drugs, random fingers prodding the vagina (chill - they’re experts), pressure on mothers to have epidurals and ceasarians, isolating the newlyborn from parents, telling mothers when thay can and can’t feed their own child etc.
Oh yeah - Western Medicine knows where its at when it comes to childbirth!!
Good cartoon FD.
I just look at the numbers, Midwife Di.
yep Mark…have done that! The decline in maternal & neonatal mortality has a lot of influencing factors..not the move to birthing in hospital. If we take the USA as an example, we see figures that are not at all great and most babies there are born in a highly medicalised system. In fact their figures are even worsening if I recall correctly…off to review that..anyone else got those facts at hand?
Yes, let the new age birth fascists rule and kick the medical people out of the birth business and return us to the good old days. Back when the “wisdom” of a midwife was all you needed. Back when infant mortality rates were terrifying, back when women dying in childbirth was common, back when more children were born with awful handicaps, back when families were torn apart by the grief of losing loved ones. Great times when a woman could enjoy the pleasures of 24 hour-plus labours without pain relief or medical assitance.
And while you’re on it Firstdog, perhaps you could address that other dreadful thing those monsters in medical science have cruelly thrust upon us - immunisation against diseases and epidemics like polio and diptheria. Far better to cure them by having a cup of herbal tea or putting a potato in your pocket like they did back in the good old days.
My single experience of a home-birth was of one which was completely unintended. My step-daughter was at our place when she went into labour and there was no time to move her to the hospital. All went wonderfully well (we had some pretty experienced mums in the house at the time) and it was a magical, if unplanned, evening.
Yes there are definitely some cases where home births are not recommended (my own birth being one, apparently) but there are many where it is fine, as well as being less stressful and more family oriented.
USA maternal mortality 1984 _1996 was at a steady 7.5 per 100,000 , currently a staggering 11 per 100,000! Interesting correlation to the increase in caesarean section rates without a subsequent major improvement in Neonatal mortality over the same period. Summary …more mothers dying , no more babies being “saved”..go figure!
Ralph..in the 1800’s 40% of women in ‘maternity’ hospitals died! Was much safer at home..as it is for most now.
“interesting correlation” - at least all intelligent Crikey readers know that this doesn’t prove causation eh. Eh? Maybe there are other causative factors at play, but it’s pretty common to pick two correlating trends to support an agenda.
Midwife Di, are you comparing conditions in maternity hospitals in the 1800s with present day Australia? Not exactly comparing like with like I would think. And where are your figures to prove that it was much safer at home back in the 19th century? If your hospital death figures are correct, and 4 in 10 does sound amazingly high, how do you know that it wasn’t 50% deaths at home, or 60%?
Of course Im not suggesting that there are not other causative factor sinvolved. Just demonstrating a point that the mega medicalised births in the USA still have a high, and rising, maternal mortality, and that hospitals are not necessarily safe.
Ralph given that the generally accepted cause of ‘childbed fever’ in the 1800’s was lack of asepsis, it is easy to asume that mothers at home were not exposed to the germs from the doctors who were transmitting infections from patient to patient. Im also just guessing Ralph, but if figures at home were even higher..there wouldnt be many people around at all!
You do realise that a hell of a lot of US mothers can’t actually afford to give birth in a hospital
and if you can’t pay you don’t get in.
Isn’t the decision really to do with the problem of the Govt getting indemnity insurance for midwives attending home births? That’s not “medical ideology becoming the new religion”, it’s corporates safeguarding profits…
The drop in maternal deaths was due to improvements in public health: knowledge about infection control; availability of antibiotics; having access to clean water; basic hygiene. It just so happened that the rise of obstetrics occurred at the same time. See Tew, M “Safer Childbirth”.
Labour and birth go well when a woman feels safe and confident. For some women this will be in hospital, for some this will be at home. Whether you want to birth at home or not is irrelevant to the issue: this is about a woman’s right to choose where and with whom she gives birth. Large studies published in the last few years have shown that homebirth outcomes are the same for ‘low risk’ women so no one can claim that it’s going to cost the Government more money. In fact for a long time it has cost it less money.
It costs less, it’s safe, women will do it whether they have an ‘eligible’ midwife there or not. Let’s make it safe by making sure midwives are there for the times when help is needed.
“You do realise that a hell of a lot of US mothers can’t actually afford to give birth in a hospital
and if you can’t pay you don’t get in.”
This is simply not true.
45 hour labour, you’ve gotta be a homebirth wingnut (see bernard Keane) to do that, First Dog.
JONATHAN GREEN: Moi? Guilty as charged. Hehehehehe.
cheers
Venise
I delivered my son on the Loungeroom floor.
Tense and emotional; Yes.
Happy outcome: Yes.
Give me an educated midwife with the ability to access medical resources who isn’t taking up a bed in a hospital rather than a nurse who is overworked, under resourced and ‘rostered on to that ward’, anyday.
.
Drops in rates of maternal deaths and various communicable diseases due to basic hygiene, diet, environmental factors/work conditions and education are the fantastic legacy we have from dragging our lives back from the control of the priests and ‘doctor gods’.
Immunisation is a great idea if applied correctly. But rates of many diseases dropped considerably in countries where it was never implemented at the time.
Exposure to pathogens, in a ‘not at risk’ person will provide a greater degree of long term protection.
.
My fear is, without proper support and education (and insurance), ‘hack’ midwives will be driven underground.
It is a cheap stunt to go down the ‘you’re a hippy and you think herb tea will solve it’ path. That type of patronising arrogance is also a pathetic form of ignorance.
Australians have the most expensive urine in the world, with the quantity of supplements they consume, with some of the leading rates of chronic illness.
Fear is the mind killer.
Yes FD we do need the wise and experienced to return to our health system after leaving for lack of challenge, training, support and opportunity in the early ‘nineties. Huge numbers went to the UK and Ireland to shore up their health offer bordering on collapse. So what did we do? We swung on a hammock, cut back on training and reduced pay-packets to peanuts ignoring the inevitable signs of a country minus an educated populace. The price of ignoring precedents.
http://www.reducinginfantmortality.com/
an interesting insight into how inappropriate use of technology endangers babies.
Can’t we all just get along?
Seems pretty simple to me - as Midwife Di said - mothers who want to give birth at home can do so, and can still access a hospital if needed.
So giving birth at home isn’t denying access to a hospital, just seeing if you can do without it first.
If some people want to take up less beds and resources in hospitals, and do something for themselves (safely, with assistance from trained professionals), shouldn’t they be encouraged?
Seems like a no-brainer, really.
PWNEROUS: You are committing a cardinal error here. You are assuming people will appreciate logic. IMHO this whole Birthing business has become the latest religion. The one thing which people of religion can’t hack is called logic. There are even some who are calling child-birth a mystical experience. I dare say Christ had exactly the same mystical experience as the first nail was hammered through his hand.
Venise
It seems to me that you and others on this thread are using the its like a religion point to avoid the debate. Yes there may be a few crazies out there like on any single issue on both sides of any debate. It seems to me that on the evidence that home births for low risk women with an experienced midwife is not a problem. If a problem arises they can access a hospital. Yes bad things will probably happen on some occasions, but it was not that long ago a women miscarried in the toilet of a Sydney hospital because she could not get care.
While I haven’t really looked specifically at any studies for home birth v hospitals I have looked at our and the western worlds intervention rates for births and they are not good. The high rates of intervention are by and large bad for the mother and bad for the baby and a higher cost than necessary to the public health purse.
I can’t help but feel that some of the crazies on the other side of this debate are already getting stuck into the bad mother meme before the baby is even born and hiding this with arguments around their opponents apparent religious fanaticism. I mean how dare those upstart woman exercise choice.
YUWALK: I’ve never been against choice. Ever. Just as it’s my choice not to listen/read/whatever, people who carry things to extremes. Extremes lead to religions. Religions are there, as are men, to control women.
It would have had to go through his wrist Venise.
SBH: I think you’re wrong. But I love your sense of humour.
Why Thank you Venise, that’s very kind.
There is a very interesting book called “Consuming Pleasures - Australia and the International Drug Business”. In it the author John Rainford starts with a history of the medical profession, and describes how infant and mother mortality went up enormously when people first started heading to hospital to have their babies, because of the poor hygeine and lack of understanding of infection control. He also illustrates the point that reduced infant mortality rates owe far more to civil engineers than doctors or medicine.
I think proof of homebirth is in the survival of the human race to this point - don’t you? There has been no infant mortality at birth in either side of my family as far back as memory goes. There is also the issue of the number of babies that arrive early in all kinds of places…where does that fit into this proposed system?