Homebirth: What to expect

Homebirth care is always individualised to the needs of the woman and family.  The following information can help you to understand what may happen in labour, to give you a sense of your options and lessen any surprises. When you birth at home, you can expect to:

- Wear whatever you like in labour
- Have vaginal examinations when / if you want them. Your midwife may suggest an examination if she feels it is needed, which is not very often as we know that babies are born whether vaginal examinations are performed or not and many women prefer to avoid them wherever possible.
- To have your temperature, blood pressure and pulse taken when it is necessary to do so – sometimes this is not done at all
- Have your baby’s heart beat listened to with a hand-held doppler that allows you to remain in the bath or shower.
- If additional fluids are needed, you can expect your midwife to offer you lots of drinks – this will also help to keep up your energy levels. In fact, your midwife will probably offer food and fluids regularly throughout your labour anyway.
- We don’t use ID bands at home. Not for Mum, not for baby. No chance of anyone getting lost, everyone knows who’s who, and no mother is handed the wrong baby!
- Your waters are very unlikely to be broken at home.
- You can expect to give birth in the position that’s most comfortable to you at the time. For many women, this is kneeling (so you can catch your own baby) or all fours (and your partner can catch the baby).
- Waterbirth is a common birth method at home.
- While “pain relief” is not offered, your midwife will make suggestions to assist your level of comfort such as position changes, hot packs, bath, shower, massage and so on.
- You will find that your body will push instinctively when the time’s right.
- Many women will not tear and episiotomy is very rare at home.
- Placentas usually come of their own accord, in their own time provided that the blood loss is not excessive.
- Your baby’s cord will be cut after the placenta is born, and some women prefer to leave it intact and have a lotus birth.
- There is no separation of mother and baby.

Learn more about private midwifery care, antenatal shared care and antenatal classes

Risk assessment in pregnancy and birth

Risk assessment has been around for a long time in maternity care and has become more widely spoken about as midwifery-led services have expanded. Risk assessment is a way of identifying potential problems and minimising risks to the woman and baby. Some form of risk assessment is used in almost every profession and although the actual risk assessment process is not perfect, it’s the best tool we have at present. Risk assessment is used on OH&S, education, food service, health, media, emergency services, law and so on.

In maternity, risk assessment is an incredibly useful tool. The benefit of risk assessment is that it is based on science and evidence. We can state with certainty the risks of certain complications such as pre-eclampsia and this is helpful when preparing women for what to expect and things to be on the look-out for. In this way, risk assessment actually lowers the risk to the woman because she can become more involved in her care and more alert for signs that mean she needs to get help.

The downside of risk assessment is that it does tend to categorise women according to a tick-box system. Although the risk might be there, it might not necessarily eventuate for the woman sitting with us.

How can risk assessment be useful?

Risk assessment can be an incredibly useful tool for both women and midwives in helping to plan care that will meet the woman’s needs safely. Midwives are primary care providers and are responsible for proving care to healthy, low-risk women and babies throughout pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period. So a risk assessment tool helps the midwife and woman to know when a consultation or referral is needed.

Risk assessments can also highlight potential problems that would benefit from early organisation and planning before labour. This might include reviewing the birth plan, reviewing place of birth, engaging other health professionals and putting in place supports so that the woman can cope well after the baby is born.

Risk assessment can also be useful for discussing homebirth with women and their partners. Some women are perfectly suited to homebirth: they’re healthy, their pregnancy is going well and they’re wanting a natural birth. In this case, risk assessment can be used to explain to the woman that she’s safer at home.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Homebirth transfer rates: cause for concern?

What is a woman really asking when she asks her midwife what the midwife’s transfer rate is?

Women often interview several private midwives when they are choosing the right midwife for their needs. Women will ask many questions of their prospective midwife, and one of the more common questions is, “What is your transfer rate?” meaning, “what percentage of the women who book with you for homebirth, end up transferring to hospital?”

On the surface, this seems like a fair question. But what is the woman really asking? I consider that the woman is really asking, “If I book with you, what’s my chance of being transferred?” and when women ask the same question of several midwives, they are most reassured by the midwife with the lowest transfer rate because they perceive that they have the lowest chance of transferring if they go with the midwife with the lowest transfer rate.

Is it a fair assumption to make, that the midwife’s transfer rate, representing her previous client’s outcomes, are a valid guage for the current woman’s likelihood of transfer? Often I find that transfers can’t be predicted at the time a woman books-in for care. If we could predict it, we’d recommend a planned hospital birth. Considering transfer rates from this perspective, a midwife’s transfer rate has no bearing on the current woman sitting with her. As well as this, some transfers occur because the woman has requested it – eg a request for transfer for an epidural, but not on the advice of the midwife as the labour is actually progressing very normally. The other situation that can arise is that the midwife forsees problems occurring and makes some recommendations to avert those problems, but the woman considers the recommendations and declines to follow them. In these cases, again, the midwife’s transfer rate has no bearing on each new client who interviews a midwife.

What’s a “good” homebirth transfer rate?

Well, many might argue that the lowest transfer rate is the best transfer rate. You’re setting out for a homebirth, right? So why go to the midwife with a “high” transfer rate?

I did some scouting around on the internet and found that transfer rates range from 10% through to 50%. The Netherlands has a transfer rate of 52%! This surprised me. In the Netherlands, 86% women start in “primary” care (midwifery care), 28% are transferred in pregnancy and 17% are transferred in labour, leaving 41% women birthing with midwifery care. Of this 41%, 30% occurred at home and 11% occurred in hospital.

The St George hospital homebirth program reported a transfer rate of 37% for its first 100 births and this was in a low-risk clientele (at the start of pregnancy). Their outcomes were excellent, however and the satisfaction of the women and midwives using / working in the service was very high.

Private midwives’ transfer rates vary – anywhere from 10% to 40% in some States of Australia as well as overseas. So there’s a wide fluctuation. What can we deduce from these transfer rates?

Well, with the exception of the Netherlands – which has large numbers – we can’t really deduce very much at all. You never can when you’re dealing with small numbers. Private midwives in Australia typically don’t attend more than 25-30 births a year, and some as few as 5 births a year. One transfer in 5 births is 20%, whereas if that same midwife had attended more births without complication, perhaps the transfer rate would have only been 10%.

There are a couple of things to consider with high and low transfer rates:
1. The risk status of the women at booking
2. The midwife’s adherence to safety and risk management guidelines and her outcomes.

The midwife with the lowest transfer rate might simply have a low transfer rate because she only attends very low risk women: women who have birthed without complication before, who have no health history and who have no problems in their current pregnancy.

The midwife with the high transfer rate might not be transferring willy-nilly, she might just be taking on a higher risk group of women and adopting a wait and see approach – eg, “yes, you have a family history of high blood pressure and you’ve had it with every pregnancy thus far, but let’s try some preventative measures and see what happens this time”, and continue with homebirth plans. If this woman’s blood pressure went up, she would have been transferred, contributing to the midwife’s “high” transfer rate. The low risk / low transfer rate midwife might not have accepted this woman for homebirth at all, hence the difference in transfer rates.

The other thing to consider with transfer rates is the midwife’s commitment to safety and risk management. Some midwives may have low transfer rates because the decision to transfer is prolonged, or because risk factors are denied. Is it good to have a low transfer rate if women or babies have been compromised?

But getting back to the question, “If I book with you, what’s my chance of being transferred?”, this question is impossible to answer.
1. We can’t tell the future. Family history and health history might shine some light on possible issues for the pregnancy, but not necessarily. We can’t predict all the paths a pregnancy can follow.
2. A woman’s determination to move towards – and remain in – a state of health and wellness is a life-long journey that pre-dates the pregnancy.
3. Although midwives will make recommendations with the aim of homebirth in mind, it is the woman’s right to consider the advice and decline it. Declining a midwife’s advice may well mean that a transfer will become necessary.
4. Midwives’ statistics are only relevant to her past clients, not the client sitting with her currently.
5. For many midwives, the goal is really safety: safety for woman and baby. We strive to achieve the safest birth in the setting that can best meet the needs of our client.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Planning a homebirth vs having a homebirth

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Is it just semantics? “I’m having a homebirth” versus, “I’m planning a homebirth”? I often wonder why more women don’t plan homebirths. Planning a homebirth doesn’t rule out hospital as an option if it’s needed or desired. Planning a homebirth keeps all options open and allows women to make the decision about place of birth towards the end of the pregnancy or even in labour.

Sometimes I’m concerned when I hear, “I’m having a homebirth”. The same way I’m concerned if I hear, “I’m having an epidural / induction / waterbirth” or whatever. Yes, these are our plans, but we never really know what’s going to happen until the time.

There is a transfer rate associated with homebirth and this reflects safe practice and respect for women’s decisions. Bearing that in mind, it’s wiser to say, “I’m planning a homebirth” rather than, “I’m having a homebirth”.

Also, consider the reactions from family and friends when they hear these words. When we “plan” a homebirth, friends and family are put at ease. Plans can change if they need to. The common response, “Homebirth?!?! Isn’t that … dangerous??” is no longer needed because plans can change if risks emerge. Sometimes when people hear, “I’m having a homebirth”, they don’t understand that if hospital is needed, we go. The common questions like, “what if you need a caesarean?” “what if you need an epidural?” are valid when we frame it as “having” a homebirth because these interventions are not available at home. But when homebirth is “planned”, those questions are no longer necessary: plans can change.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

The Benefits of Using a Midwife During Childbirth

In Australia, all babies are born with the help of a midwife. This is true whether you’re giving birth in hospital, birth centre, at home or in an operating theatre. The question is really – what are the benefits to having a midwife as your primary care provider?

So, what is a primary care provider?
A primary care provider is someone who is responsible for your pregnancy and birth care. They may also been seen as the coordinator of your care or “go-to” person. It may either be a doctor or a midwife. Your primary care provider should know all about you and your pregnancy, attend your birth and know all about your baby. Without a primary care provider, your care will be fragmented and it’s entirely possible that some important aspects of your care will be overlooked or forgotten.

Primary medical care is provided by private obstetricians or through doctor’s clinics in public hospitals.

What are the benefits of having a midwife as your primary care provider?
Midwives have a firm belief in pregnancy and birth as natural processes that women can do. In other words, they believe that a woman’s body is perfectly designed for pregnancy and birth. They look for what’s right in the pregnancy and birth, while always being mindful of risks. Midwives help to keep pregnancy and birth normal by focussing on nutrition, lifestyle, health and well being. We that with health in general, healthy people are less likely to get heart disease, diabetes and so on. Well, it’s the same in pregnancy and birth: healthy women and babies are less likely to get sick. So midwives focus on health and well being, while always being alert for situations that need more attention.

Midwives use a holistic, or biopsychosocial model of care. What this means is that you’re not just a pregnancy or a birth to a midwife. You’re a woman, mother, friend, wife, partner, employer / employee and so on. Your midwife will seek information about your life, your family, your interests and so on, as well as your health and medical history. She will take all of this information into account when making recommendations and giving advice.

Midwives are less likely to use disruptive technologies that may lead to further intervention and complications. They’re less likely to induce labour, perform an episiotomy, perform vaginal examinations, break your waters and so on. So your labour is allowed to progress naturally. When you work with your body, it will work with you. When you interfere with your bodily processes, your body will not work as well. This is especially the case in birth where there’s a strong reliance on hormones to initiate labour and keep it going.

Women are usually very satisfied with midwifery care. They feel supported, emotionally, from seeing a midwife. They feel they can trust their midwife and that their wishes are respected. Women feel more comfortable to write a birth plan and discuss their hopes and preferences for their pregnancy and labour when they see a midwife.

So, what does this mean for birth and babies?
Well, there are lots of positives! When you have a midwife as your primary care provider, you can expect:
- choice of birth place (hospital or home)
- a lower rate of caesarean
- a lower rate of episiotomy
- you’re less likely to be induced
- you’re less likely to need pain medication in labour
- you’re less likely to have your waters broken
- you will be listened to and respected
- your birth plan will be respected
- you will be able to build trust with the midwife who will help you in birth
- you will be less likely to have an assisted birth (eg forceps)
- you will have a lower chance of getting postnatal depression
- you will be less likely to have a traumatic birth
- you will be more likely to bond well with your baby
- your baby will be more likely to breastfeed successfully
- you will most likely view your labour as being very positive

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Why Birth at Home?

Homebirth provides a familiar and safe environment for birthing. This helps to keep stress hormones low, and positive birth hormones high, and can therefore make the birth easier and less painful. Women choose a homebirth because they believe in their body’s ability to birth, wish to involve their partner and other children more, or prefer to reduce the chance of intervention in their labour. And becuase let’s face it: pregnancy and birth are normal, healthy and natural experiences. We don’t go to hospital to experience other normal, healthy and natural bodily experiences such as food digestion, urination, menstruation, defecation …. we trust that our bodies work, and that these processes work too.

Women choose homebirth to:
Experience fewer complications in labour
Reduce the need for interventions
Use less pain medication
Remain in comfortable and familiar surroundings
Have a baby who has fewer problems after the birth
Increase their success with breastfeeding
Improve bonding with their baby
Provide a gentle birth for their baby
Involve other siblings and family
Have choice and control
Reduce birth trauma
Receive care from the same midwife right the way through
Benefit from having more choices available
Have a great birth!

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Is Homebirth Right for me?

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

For most women, home birth is a safe and responsible decision. Homebirth is possible for women who:

Are having their first babies
Are having their second, third or subsequent babies
Have had a previous traumatic birth
Had a very fast birth last time
Prefer a more natural experience
Are healthy

Why choose homebirth?
Some women find that having their baby in the comfort of their home provides a supporting environment.

This helps to keep stress hormones low, and positive birth hormones high, making the birth easier and less painful.

Other women homebirth because they believe in their body’s ability to birth, wish to involve their partner and other children, or prefer to reduce the chance of intervention in their labour.

A number of different research studies have looked into the safety of homebirth – all reliable research has found that for healthy women, homebirth is a safe option.

Keeping Homebirth Safe
A common question I am asked is, “What if something goes wrong?” Private midwives take several precautions to keep home birth safe. This includes things such as:

Screening women carefully so that only low-risk, healthy women birth at home
Careful monitoring during pregnancy and labour to ensure that any possible risks are detected early, allowing time for transfer to hospital or consultation with obstetric staff
Building a relationship with the woman that is based on mutual trust and respect. This is central to an effective relationship between woman and midwife.

Midwives who birth with women at home are educated and experienced to assess the wellbeing of mother and baby throughout pre-pregnancy, pregnancy, birth and the postnatal / neonatal period. Midwives use the ACMI Guidelines for Referral and Consultation to support clinical decision-making in consultation with the client. Of course, with a homebirth, you have the right to make your own informed decisions about your care and your decisions are respected.

The Cost of Homebirth
Some people believe that private / independent midwifery care is expensive. I have prepared the following table to explain how the services are broken down. Home birth services are very comprehensive, and home birth midwives spend many hours with women and their families, building a strong relationship during the pregnancy that carries through to the birth and beyond. Typical home birth services consume a whopping 72 hours of a midwife’s time!

PLUS
On-call – for the duration of the pregnancy: you need to be available for whatever might come up
Research
Administrative tasks
Professional consultation with other professionals on the client’s behalf

As you can see, the service provided by a private midwife is comprehensive and does not compare easily with other maternity services in terms of continuity of care, hours of contact, follow-up and availability. When you choose a home birth with an independent midwife, you are choosing gold standard service.

As you can understand, when midwives provide this level of service, it is impossible to book more than two or three clients each month.

Some women ask me whether I will provide reduced services such as no postnatal care, one or two antenatal visits, a late booking, and so on, in order to reduce the cost. I prefer to provide a comprehensive service and the women who book with me see the value in this approach. A home birth is an investment in you and your baby, afterall. And you deserve the very best.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Options for pregnancy care

There are two main decisions to make about your care: one is your place of birth, and the other is your care provider.

Sometimes one decision will force another, for example an obstetrician will only deliver babies in a hospital, and birth centre care will generally mean having midwifery care.

But there are many other combinations:

Private midwife – home birth
Private midwife – hospital birth (public hospital as a private patient; private hospital as a private patient; public hospital as a public patient)
Public hospital care – midwives
Public hospital care – obstetricians
Public hospital care – shared care with a GP

and so on. There is really quite a lot of choice when you think about it.

Ultimately, if continuity is important to you, you will need to look to the private system – either obstetrics or midwifery – to ensure as much as possible that your chosen care provider will actually be there to help you in birthing.

The other thing to consider is that midwives and obstetricians, especially in the private sector – will tend to book out early. Some obstetricians will require you to book an appointment as soon as you find out you are pregnant, and will be fully booked at around 6 weeks. For many private midwives, this is the same. Other times, you my find that you can change from the public system to the private system later in pregnancy and a space will be made available for you.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

No place like home for birth

Link

FORMER Play School presenter Noni Hazlehurst said it was sad that more women who had low-risk pregnancies were not encouraged to have a home birth.

Noni Hazlehurst is among several women who have spoken in favour of homebirthing in the upcoming documentary ‘The Face of Birth’

She described it as a natural, empowering and beneficial experience.

Hazlehurst, who had two home births, said some of her friends were alarmed by her decision, but she said it was a humbling experience.

A DVD to premiere in Melbourne tomorrow features Victorian, national and international medical experts, midwives and academics advocating a woman’s right to choose their place of birth.

It comes after the tragic death of a Melbourne woman who died in hospital the day after her home birth.

Melbourne film-maker and actor Kate Gorman, who gave birth at home, said the film highlighted the unspoken aspects of the debate.

She said they were not saying that all women should have a home birth.

In the DVD, titled The Face of Birth, Hazlehurst says she decided to have home births with qualified midwives because she had heard horror stories about medical interventions in hospital.

She said her mother told her that in the UK only pregnant women with complications had babies in hospitals.

Hazlehurst said her son’s birth was unforgettable.

“It is a much more peaceful and empowering experience if you can have a natural birth in your own environment,” …

She said the hospital was on standby and the reward was two beautiful and healthy children.

Hazlehurst said there was a place for medical intervention, but if women with a low-risk pregnancy wanted to have a home birth they should not be frightened out of it …

Noni touches on the safety aspects of home birth: low-risk women, attended by a midwife, and with hospital back-up. Under these conditions, homebirth is a safe and amazing experience for mother and baby.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Birth review not acted on

Link

One-third of the recommendations from a review into the safety of homebirths have not been acted on, including calls for a more robust investigation of baby deaths …

The report blames limited resources for the lack of progress on meeting the 2008 review’s 24 recommendations, with no evidence of progress in eight of them.

The Health Department ordered the audit a year ago, after its expert committee … found the stillbirth rate in homebirths was four times higher than that of hospital births …

It’s not uncommon to find that under-resourcing impacts the adoption of review findings, but it is unfortunate for homebirth that this is the case. Unfortunately, recent events in WA, VIC and SA have painted an unpleasant image of homebirth that is not deserved, and when review findings go unacted on, we are denied the opportunity of improving the public (media) perception of homebirth. The reality is that low-risk, midwife-attended homebirth, with good back-up plans, medical support and a supportive health system, is a very safe, healthy and satisfying way to birth a baby. Recent research from the UK supports the idea that low-risk women who have previously birthed their babies vaginally are actually safer birthing at home than in a hospital or birth centre stetting.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Home births get backing from Dannii Minogue

Link

DANNII Minogue would not hesitate to try to have a home birth again.

… Minogue remains a staunch defender of the practice that continues to be a hot topic of debate among many mothers.

Minogue tried to give birth to her son … at … home … but, after labouring for several hours, was transferred to the hospital on the advice of her midwife.

“I don’t care what anyone else says about having a home birth, that felt right for me,” she said. “It’s about your body and what you feel comfortable with” …

Homebirth is a really special and wonderful way to bring a baby into the world. Even if a transfer is needed, most women would agree with Dannii that the model of care that is provided means that a transfer can be a physically and emotionally safe experience.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Midwives Make Home Births Safer for Babies

Link

Babies born at home are at increased risk for health problems immediately after birth compared with babies born in hospitals … However, a midwife may make a difference in the health of babies born at home …

… babies born at home were more likely to have a neonatal seizure and low Apgar scores at five minutes after birth … But when a … midwife was present, it seems babies born at home may fare as well as those born in hospitals …

… Home births are known to be associated with fewer obstetric interventions …

… findings are based on an analysis of more than 2 million births in the United States in 2008. Of these, 12,433 (or 0.54 percent) were home births …

It is helpful to have studies that can demonstrate the value of midwifery care in a home birth. Homebirth often gets a back rap in the media, however often the media confuses unattended homebirths with midwife-attended homebirth.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Maternal Death following a Homebirth

Much has been published recently about the very unfortunate death of a mother following a homebirth with private midwives. No details have been released that could allow us to form an opinion that this woman’s death was “because” she birthed at home, and it is also possible that an appropriate and timely transfer was arranged and that she died of complications that arose in hospital. I am not privy to any more details than what can be found in the local press. Even though at this stage, no-one really knows how or why Caroline died, many people have taken the opportunity to make assumptions as to the exact cause of death, and more so, they are certain that her death would have been preventable and hence avoidable had she birthed in hospital. I am astounded that anyone could make such assumptions – and that the media would publish such opinions – when they are not grounded in fact.

So, what do we know?

Maternal mortality includes deaths in women up to a year after giving birth or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy. The maternal mortality rate in Australia varies between about 8.4 and 11.1 per 100,000.

Direct maternal deaths are those that result from obstetric complications of pregnancy. This includes such things as amniotic fluid embolism, haemorrhage, infection and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.

As well as direct maternal deaths, there are also indirect maternal deaths, and these are deaths that result from pre-existing disease which maybe aggravated by pregnancy or birth. This can include such things as heart disease, psychiatric causes, epilepsy and so on.

It has been suggested that since 1999, there has only been one other woman who has died following a homebirth attended by a midwife. The AIHW report for 1997-99 also describes another maternal death following a homebirth, however that was an unattended homebirth (ie, the woman had given birth at home without a midwife present). Both women died of postpartum haemorrhages.

The question we need to ask, is whether these reports of maternal death following homebirth reach statistical significance. In statistics, a result is statistically significant if it is unlikely to have occurred by chance. It is possible that the two maternal deaths following midwife-attended home births are the only deaths we will have for the next 50-odd years; or it could be that in the next few years, we will have far more maternal deaths following midwife-attended homebirths. Certainly, other countries do not report an increased maternal mortality rate for women birthing at home with a midwife.

All of this said, it is incumbent on every midwife who attends homebirths to advise women of the increased risk of death and serious injury should a major complication occur at home. This is related to the lack of resources, staff and facilities at home and the time and distance needed to transfer to hospital in an urgent situation. This, however, is also the case in a smaller public or private hospital, where if something should go horribly wrong, those facilities would also not have the immediate capability to provide the best possible assistance.

In the event of major complications, a team effort is really needed: midwives, obstetricians, anaesthetist, operating theatre, intensive care unit, medications, IV lines, equipment for monitoring the heart and respiration and blood pressure, ultrasound imaging and so on. However, it also needs to be said that this would only be in very rare and exceptional circumstances that can mostly be known in advance. We also know that serious complications that can result in death are more likely when women have had interventions in labour and birth.

This is why women are encouraged to birth in hospital if their medical history suggests that they are at a higher risk of life-threatening complications in birth (eg epilepsy, clotting disorders, high blood pressure, and so on), and it also why midwives are reluctant to attend any form of intervention in the home setting. At the slightest hint of a complication, a responsible midwife will advise her client to transfer to hospital in the interests of safety.

All of this said (and done), low risk does not mean no risk. A perfectly healthy, low-risk woman experiencing a normal pregnancy and a normal labour can still experience a massive postpartum hemorrhage that cannot be effectively managed by the equipment available at a home birth. It also could not be managed at a small private or public hospital where theatre staff, anaesthetists, monitoring equipment etc might not be readily available. It is important for women to understand that while this is highly unlikely to ever happen, should it happen, it does increase the risk of death or serious injury (eg brain damage). It is a difficult task counselling women in very rare but very serious possibilities, and birthing women need to feel free to make the best decisions for them and their families, in the full knowledge of all possibilities. Midwives should not withhold this information from women as it is materially significant to their decisions about place of birth.

Certainly, the media takes the view that all homebirth deaths could be prevented by having those women birth in hospital. This may be true. Or maybe not. Private midwives examine the deaths of women in hospitals, and often comment that those deaths might have been preventable had those women birthed at home or with a private midwife in hospital. Cases of women dying following unnecessary caesareans. Women suiciding in the early postnatal period with no support in caring for their baby and ineffective antenatal planning for the possibility of postnatal depression. Women dying of postpartum haemorrhage following induced labour (induction is a risk for PPH) for hypertension: it might surprise you to know that rates of high blood pressure are very low amongst women cared for by private midwives. A PPH in a woman who had had a caesarean for her third baby – a breech baby: this woman could very easily have proceeded with a vaginal birth, especially given that it was her third baby. Avoidance of the caesarean might have meant no PPH and saved her life. These are the sorts of cases where hospital doesn’t “save” women from death: it might be seen, in some cases to actually cause the death, however the media will never report on this.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Homebirth: the right choice, naturally

Link

WHEN Kate Randell and Chris Lockyer welcomed baby Mali, it happened in their comfortable family home.

The couple decided to have a homebirth because Ms Randell’s pregnancy was low-risk and, after nine years’ experience as a midwife, she knew she would feel more natural and relaxed in her own house.

… the couple were prepared with a homebirthing kit, including oxygen and advanced medical supplies, had a registered midwife on hand and were willing to go to hospital if there were any complications.

She said she would never have considered a home birth if she was having twins or the pregnancy was high-risk.

“With any high-risk pregnancy the best place is in a hospital, but with a low-risk, normal, healthy pregnancy and a labour where everything is going OK – it should be whatever the parents feel most comfortable with,” …

… “Most people don’t realise that all birth has risk and that babies die in hospital, too, not just at home,” …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

More Women Choosing To Have Their Babies At Home

Link

Despite a decrease in home births between 1990 and 2004, the number of home births actually increased between 2004 and 2009 by 29%, an upturn of 0.56% in 2004, to 0.72% in 2009. In 2009, a total of 29,650 home births were reported in the United States. This is the most home births reported since researchers began analyzing data on this topic in 1989 …

Benefits Of Home Births

More private, less chaotic
The woman is surrounded by the comforts of her own home
Fewer people involved
Lower chance of a C-section
Cheaper
More personal experience

Midwives Are Present At Most Home Births
62% of home births reported in 2009 occurred in the presence of midwives, while only 7% of hospital births had a midwife present. 19% of home births had a certified nurse present, and 43% of home births were supervised by other types of midwives, for example, direct-entry midwives or certified professional midwives. The study reports that a mere 5% of home births had taken place in the presence of doctors, probably because the majority of them occurred without notice. 92% of hospital births had doctors present.

33% of home births were supervised by someone other than a doctor or midwife. For example, family members may have helped …

Taking A Look Back
The way women choose to deliver their babies has drastically changed in the last 100 years:

In 1900, the majority of births took place outside of a hospital – very few women had their babies at a place other than their own homes.
During 1940, only 44% of women chose to have their babies at home
By 1969, 1% of women were having their babies at home. (These figures remained the same into the 1980s)

The move from homebirth to hospital birth occurred with no rigorous studies of either birth place. Recent research has now concluded that for a healthy, low-risk woman, a homebirth is no more dangerous to her or the baby, than a hospital birth. It is only when complications are added to the mix, that we start to see that home birth is less safe than hospital birth. Research is also conclusive that if we take a healthy, low-risk woman and assist her to birth at home, she will experience less intervention and more satisfaction with her birth experience, compared to birthing in hospital. Homebirths are making an evidence-based comeback!

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

The Unkindest Cut: Countdown to a C-Section

Link

… “Usually I start off by telling people my C-section started even before I got to the hospital …

… Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women and Newborns had the highest rate of cesarean section deliveries in San Diego County in 2009. The California average was 29.8 per 100 births; at Sharp Mary Birch, the rate was 37.7.

… At 40 weeks … Cooper-Schultz’s water broke, though she was not in labor. In a birthing class … they told her, we have to get the baby out within 24 hours. So she and her husband went to the hospital right away.

“They pretty much wanted to put me on Pitocin the minute I walked in the door because I wasn’t having regular contractions,” …

… women believe their C-section deliveries at Mary Birch were the result of convenience for the doctors, fear of litigation, and/or lack of staff training in nonmedicated childbirth options.

… It is common for hospitals to use Pitocin if a woman has not gone into active labor within 24 hours after her water has broken to avoid the risk of infection. But the staff at Mary Birch wanted to give Cooper-Schultz Pitocin within the first two hours.

Cooper-Schultz refused the Pitocin at first. She wanted to get things going naturally … At the 12-hour mark, her cervix had dilated to four centimeters. She says she now understands that this “is a good natural labor progression for a first-time mom.”

But it wasn’t fast enough for the staff at Mary Birch. Cooper-Schultz … allowed them to give her the Pitocin that she says they’d been pushing since she’d arrived.

… “They weren’t honest with me. They didn’t say, ‘If you get the Pitocin, you’re probably going to need an epidural.’”

… Cooper-Schultz withstood the pain of Pitocin contractions for eight hours before she finally gave in and got an epidural … The epidural worked on only her left half.

At one point, the doctor came in to check on her and alerted the nurses that she was going home to take her kids to school. Sometime later, she returned with wet hair, checked Cooper-Schultz, found her at nine centimeters, and told her to try pushing.

“I pushed, and [the baby’s] heart rate went down … she said she’s worried about it. She said, ‘He’s not in distress, but he’s a little bit stressed.’”

The doctor told Cooper-Schultz it would go one of three ways. In the first scenario, Cooper-Schultz would push for 20 or so minutes and the baby would come out. In the second, she could push for 20 or so minutes, the baby would not come out, and they’d have to do an emergency cesarean section. Or, the doctor said, they could do a cesarean section right now.

Cooper-Schultz chose the cesarean. …
∗ ∗ ∗

Helen … welcomes me into her North Park apartment shortly after the dinner hour on a Tuesday evening in mid-September. She tells me she’s an unlikely candidate for natural childbirth.

“I’m like Woody Allen,” she says. “I am a New Yorker who likes living in the city, who likes creature comforts. And for somebody like me to be embracing [natural childbirth] is humongous.”

… Dover’s story is similar to Cooper-Schultz’s in that it begins with a desire to give birth naturally … and ends in what she considers an unnecessary C-section. One difference is that when Dover started out, she did know she might have to fight for what she wanted … She stayed home and labored for 10 to 12 hours before she went to the hospital, avoiding “the clock” for as long as she could.

When she arrived, armed with her research and her hopes for a natural birth, she found that the environment at Mary Birch had a greater impact on her than she’d imagined it would.

… The progression she’d experienced at home, from two centimeters to four, slowed drastically when she arrived at the hospital. A doctor told her that it might help if he broke her water. So she allowed it. But nothing happened …

… Dover lists her regrets: Not waiting and laboring longer at home. Allowing the Pitocin at 12 hours. Giving in to the epidural after 8 more hours. But the regrets go as far back as her pregnancy, when she chose to stay with Sharp.

“I should’ve just switched … “In order for me to switch to Scripps and go to one of the birth rooms at Scripps, which has a much better record, would have meant changing everything: changing my primary care physician, changing my OBG. I would’ve had to totally change my insurance policy. And at the time, I already had a pediatrician picked out for her and everything. We’d interviewed, and just the idea of doing all of that was overwhelming. I thought I didn’t have the strength to do it.”

… “[The doctor] said, ‘You need a C-section,’” she says. “I said, ‘I don’t understand why I need a C-section. Everything seems to be fine. Her heart rate’s not dropping.’ And he said, ‘Well, she’s stuck.’”

“… I was totally against using the suction, but anything besides the total hands-off. He said, ‘I don’t want to hurt your baby, and you don’t want to hurt your baby.’ I started crying. And I just finally said, ‘Fine. Cut me open.’” …

∗ ∗ ∗

The obstetrician a woman chooses plays as large a role in her birth experience as the place she chooses to deliver her baby. Some doctors have a reputation for being more inclined to help with a natural birth, and others for being less inclined …

Thompson cites the “bait and switch,” where a doctor claims to support a woman’s birth choices up until the final weeks, when it’s too late to change doctors. Messer says she’s seen doctors who’ve initially said they’d support the hypnobirthing process but later changed their minds.

“All of a sudden it’s, ‘That’s not going to work. No, you can’t be on your hands and knees. That’s not safe, and this isn’t,’” Messer says. “And that’s at 40 weeks. So now, where can I switch?”

… Christine Stewart, a petite redhead and mother of twin girls born at Mary Birch in September 2009, says she experienced something similar with her doctor.

… “… we took a Bradley Method childbirth class,” Stewart says, “which is a 12-week class, pretty in-depth, and we decided we wanted to do natural, unmedicated labor.”

When she first mentioned this to her doctor, Stewart says the doctor told her to “keep an open mind” and not to “fixate on any particular way of labor and delivery.” At the time, Stewart thought the doctor didn’t want her to be disappointed if natural birth didn’t work out, but now she speculates that the doctor was always leaning toward a C-section.

At 36 weeks, the doctor suggested they induce her at 38 weeks. Stewart refused.

“From what I can tell,” she says, “it’s just common that it’s more manageable to have twins at 38 weeks because of size. Sometimes they’re concerned about size. But [my girls] were normal-sized.”

The doctor suggested 39 weeks, then 40. Finally, Stewart agreed to induce at 41 weeks if she hadn’t gone into labor by then. But it was unnecessary. At 40 weeks, three days short of her original due date, Stewart went into labor.

Stewart chose Mary Birch because it had everything she was looking for. Originally, she’d wanted to deliver at Best Start Birth Center in Hillcrest, but they don’t accept women who are pregnant with twins. Mary Birch, she says, seemed like the next best thing.

“It had the facilities, doctors on hand, and all these different classes — prenatal yoga — and since I was diagnosed high-risk because I had the twins and since I was over 35,” she says, “I just thought their whole entire focus is for women and newborns, so I’ll probably get the best care because they’ve got all the resources for that.”

Stewart had heard about other women going into the hospital prematurely and getting “strapped down” immediately. But in her natural childbirth class she’d learned that mobility helps with labor. So she and her husband didn’t go in right away.

Once they did arrive at the hospital, Stewart was four centimeters dilated. She gave the nursing staff her birth plan, which stated that she did not want any mention of pain medication.

“Thankfully, they did not offer medication. They were respectful of that … I was slowly dilating in a normal time frame. They were telling me that was normal …

… Christine Stewart believes that the main reason she ended up having a C-section was that her nurses had no training in natural childbirth.

“Ultimately, the outcome was because there was no one in the labor room who had the experience to help get the babies in position to be delivered,” she says.

By the time the doctor arrived, Stewart was fully dilated. She knew her babies were healthy, that they were both head down, in a good position, face forward. Her blood pressure was not elevated, she had no fever, and she’d been in labor for less than 24 hours. Everything was normal except that the babies were wedged in, each trying to get out first.

… At 2:00 a.m., the doctor came in and said, “It’s time to meet your girls.”

… I kind of resigned myself, like, ‘If this is what we have to do, this is what we have to do.’ I felt like crying because it just went against everything I had hoped for, everything I had planned and practiced for.”

“I think the hospital has some standard protocols, and I think that if you don’t follow their standard protocols, they just don’t know what to do with you,” she says. “And a C-section is manageable. They know exactly how to do it, and I think at 2:30 in the morning it’s, ‘We can manage this, and then we can all go home.’”

∗ ∗ ∗

Last March, when her first son was two and a half years old, Elizabeth Cooper-Schultz had her second child in the back bedroom of her UTC apartment, in the company of her husband, her midwife, two apprentice midwives, and a doula.

Today, Helen Dover is pregnant again. When I ask if she plans to give birth at Mary Birch, she and Henry simultaneously answer, “No.”

“What I’ve learned is that at Mary Birch, everybody’s going to try to get you to do the birth that they want you to do,” Dover explains.

For their next baby, the Dovers will stay with Sharp in order to take advantage of the tests, which would cost them thousands of dollars out-of-pocket. They will also register at Mary Birch so that they are prepared in the event of an emergency. But they have hired a midwife to help them birth at home.

“We’re going just to get what doctors are good for,” Henry says, “and then to use the midwives for what they’re good for.”….

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Choosing the best care provider for your needs

Choosing the best practitioner for your needs is a very important and personal decision. Ultimately, there is no right or wrong choice: some women will choose a private obstetrician, others will choose a private midwife and others will choose public hospital care. Some women will make an initial choice of care provider and decide to change care providers during the pregnancy. Other women will make one choice in their first pregnancy and then a different choice in a subsequent pregnancy. What’s important is to have an accurate understanding all the options available so that you can feel confident to choose the best option for your needs. The best people to talk to are the people who actually provide the service, rather than a GP who is removed from the actual services of an obstetrician / midwife / public hospital. Get referred to a private obstetrician or two; interview them; reflect on how you feel after meeting them. Go and visit your local public hospital. Have a tour and speak with the midwives there. And interview a couple of eligible midwives. You do not need a GP referral to see an eligible midwife and you can claim their services through medicare. An eligible midwife is a private midwife who has met an additional registration standard that enables them to have a Medicare provider number.

When you are considering a care provider, it’s also necessary to consider where you would like to give birth and to ensure that your care provider can attend you in your chosen setting. You might choose to birth your baby in a public hospital as a public or private patient, in a private hospital as a private patient, in a birth centre or at home. It can be helpful when trying to make a decision to write down a list of questions you may have and also consider what is important to you as you make your choices. For example:

What do I want from my care?
What type of practitioner would I feel most comfortable with?
What do I need from my practitioner to feel comfortable and safe?
Do I want public or private care?
Is continuity of care important to me?

These are questions only you can answer. Other questions are for your care providers to answer with you, and it’s a good idea to interview a few care providers – midwives and obstetricians – before making a choice. Midwives and obstetricians will charge a fee for interviews and you are able to claim this through Medicare (your midwife will need to be eligible in order for you to claim a Medicare benefit). It is important during the interview that you ask all the questions that are on your mind, and to be aware of how you feel throughout the interview. Your care provider should inspire you with confidence, help you to feel at ease and comfortable, and the appointment should feel unhurried.

Likewise, your care provider may like to “interview” you, and this is so that your care provider can be sure that s/he can meet your needs. Maternity care is provided in a partnership and so it’s important that both parties feel really comfortable with the other.

There are many questions you might wish to ask your care provider; the best suggestion is to consider what is important to you and write a list of questions.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Medicare-funded midwifery care: What you need to know

I am an eligible midwife. This means that my private patients can claim some of the cost of private midwifery care, much the same way we do when we see a GP. As well as Medicare benefits, some private health funds will provide benefits for childbirth education with a midwife, and costs may also be claimed through tax as a medical expense (more on that one from your Accountant). Medicare benefits and tax benefits combined are between $2,500 and $3,300. This means that care with an eligible midwife will be up to $3,300 cheaper than care with a non-eligible private midwife.

What is a Medicare-Eligible Midwife?

In order to claim Medicare benefits from care with your midwife, you will need to ensure that your midwife is eligible. An eligible midwife meets certain advanced requirements of a registration standard:

  • Current general registration as a midwife in Australia with no restrictions on practice;
  • Midwifery experience that constitutes the equivalent of 3 years full time post initial registration as a midwife;
  • Current competence to provide pregnancy, labour, birth and postnatal care to women and babies;
  • Successful completion of an approved professional practice review program for midwives working across the continuum of midwifery care;
  • 40 hours per year of continuing professional development relating to the continuum of midwifery care (20 hours in addition to standard requirements);
  • Pregnancy care:

    45-60 minute consultations in your home or in my clinic

  • Childbirth education
  • Continuity of carer
  • Medicare benefits
  • Obstetric back-up
  • Birth in hospital – or at home

    Continue your care with the same midwife you know and trust, with specialist obstetric back-up readily available

    Postnatal care

  • Consultations in your home and / or my rooms
  • Medicare benefits
  • Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    I’m pregnant and I have private health insurance. What are my options?

    Great question! There are a few options available to you as a private patient, as well as all of the options that are available to public patients. The private options are either a private midwife, or a private obstetrician.

    Private midwife
    To receive care from a private midwife and obtain Medicare benefits, your midwife will need to be an “eligible midwife” (meet an additional registration standard) and work with an obstetrician or a doctor who provides obstetric services. Some private midwives are able to provide labour and birth care in hospital settings, while others are only able to provide labour and birth care at home. All private midwives can provide pregnancy and postnatal care. Hospital options may include private or public hospitals; it’s best to ask your midwife which hospitals she attends births at. Eligible midwives provide complete continuity of care: the midwife you book with will be the same midwife who provides all of your pregnancy, birth and postnatal care.

    Private obstetrician
    Private obstetricians provide pregnancy, birth and postnatal care, although birth care would also be provided by hospital midwives who may be unknown to you until birth. Private obstetricians deliver babies at public and private hospitals. Continuity is provided during the pregnancy, but birth care is mostly provided by hospital midwives. Postnatal care is almost always provided by hospital midwives, with your obstetrician visiting you each day in hospital and at 6 weeks.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Physiological third stage for women at low risk of postpartum haemorrhage

    Link

    No previous study has focused on true physiological third stage for women at low risk of postpartum haemorrhage. Physiological third stage is often chosen by women who birth at home or in a birth centre, however hospital policies urge active management of the third stage (injection of syntocinon, immediate clamping and cutting of the cord and then pulling the placenta out) because studies have shown that this form of management reduces bleeding. However, it is unfortunate that those studies have either a) not clearly defined physiological management or b) have not managed the “physiological” third stages in a physiological manner. Hence, those studies have shown that active management is the safer option and hospitals have gone with those recommendations.

    This study clearly defines what is meant by physiological management and also the women who are suitable for physiological management. Some women are at a higher risk of PPH and so active management was recommended to those women in the study.

    The study compared active management which was standard at the tertiary hospital, with physiological management which was the norm at the free-standing birth centre. At the tertiary unit, 11.2% low-risk women experienced a PPH. At the midwifery-led unit, where physiological management was practiced, PPH only occurred in 2.8% women. Active management was associated with 11.5% PPHs compared with physiological management which was 1.7% PPHs. Active management was associated with a seven to eight fold increase in PPH for low-risk women.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    An amazing homebirth story

    Isabel is an amazing, strong woman who came to me for pregnancy care. She had planned to move overseas, and as you’ll read, her pregnancy came as a surprise. She planned a homebirth with a midwife overseas – but the story has a twist in it! We went about the pregnancy, preparing thoroughly for an active, natural and drug-free birth. I was thrilled to receive Isabel’s birth story, and she has kindly agreed to share it here.

    Thank You to all the women out there who shared their birth stories and experiences which gave me to determination to birth at home. Now it is my turn to write the story I have been so looking forward to… I hope I help inspire another mum-to-be to have the great confidence in her own ability and her body’s ability to birth her baby safely and naturally…love Isabel xx

    Our beautiful birth story of baby Zachary by Isabel and Jed

    It started in mid-April when I noticed an unusual change in my body. I pee-ed my pants when I sneezed. Even though I have a very weak bladder control and recurrent cystitis I had never done that before. I decided to get a urine test and after 4 weak positives I decided the product was defective and I needed to go see a real doctor tomorrow.
    Half way through a busy day at work as a Veterinarian, caring for animals, it hit me that I might be pregnant and that we weren’t really ready for this big change in our lives. I broke down and cried. I left work early to go see the doctor. Jed met me at the clinic and we saw the doctor together. The doctor promptly told me, “My Dear, there isn’t such a thing as false positive results. Only false negative are possible. You ARE pregnant!”

    I guess at that point both Jed and I had a lot of conflicting feelings. We had only just gotten married less than a month ago. We had a wedding dinner to attend in Malaysia followed by a honeymoon which required us to trek over 4000km up a mountain. At the same time it was such a big surprise and blessing to know that we were able to have a baby. We both set about sorting through our feelings and thoughts for a couple of weeks before letting the rest of the family and friends know about it.

    It was a smooth pregnancy and we had amazing help and support from friends and family. We learnt so much from our lovely midwife, Melissa Maimann and our ante natal teacher, Julie Clarke. It was basically life changing. I had known I would have needed to hit the books for this but who would have thought I find so much conflicting information. It was hard making the right choices. It was doubly hard to not have my sisters around which I rely on so much for guidance. Jed was so good and read everything I told him to. I only had to chuck temper tantrums once a month. =)

    In the end, I decided I wanted to have a home birth because I dislike being told what to do with regards to my body and I strongly dislike needles. I spent a lot of time visualising what my ideal birth/labour would be like and tried to get the support network I needed to achieve this dream. It wasn’t easy finding medical people to agree so in the end I realised it would probably just be Jed, Alicia and my mom helping me. I prayed to whoever was listening that everything would go smoothly and I that neither Zachary or I would not need medical help.

    Fast forward about 9 months to December, my mucus plug came out throughout the day on the 13th with no signs of labour. So we decided to head over to the homeopath for back up help if needed to get the contractions going.
    Almost a week later, on the 22nd of December my waters broke at 2am. It was such a surreal feeling as I sneezed and wet the bed. I was surprised at how wet the bed was and decided to stand up and this big gush of clear warm water ran down my legs. I then realised that my waters had broken and that I would be meeting my baby today.
    I woke Jed up and told him the news. Since there were no signs of contractions once again I decided to take the homeopathic remedy and we both went back to sleep.

    By 4am, I was uncomfortable enough to wake up and walk around. I emptied my bowels multiple times and drank lots of water and ate some fruit. At 5am I woke Jed up and told him to pump up the exercise ball and warm up the heat packs. By 6am, contractions were regular and about 15 minutes apart, Jed started filling up the bath tub. However, there was no hot water because the water heater had been turned off. So off he woke mom up to take over comforting me and went to boil many many pots of water.

    I sat on the bathroom floor rocking on the exercise ball and constantly visualising a soft open cervix and my baby descending nicely. I breathed nicely through each contraction remember our Calmbirth classes.
    Heat packs placed on the lower back and under the belly helped with the discomfort as well.
    The exercise ball was good for sleeping and resting on between contractions. Around 7 o’clock the bath tub was finally ready, got in and felt lots better. Alicia came shortly after and took over from mom. She gave awesome back rubs and was such a grounding energy which was exactly what I needed to get things done. Things went quickly after that.

    Jed got into the water around 8am and I knelt down with my arms wrapped around him. Contractions were about 5 minutes apart then and required a lot more attention. I kept reminding myself that each contraction meant one step closer to seeing Zachary. I felt him slowly pressing down on my cervix and my cervix dilating.
    Vocalising helped during the contractions. Jed was a great help reminding me to breathe and not hold my breath.
    He was like a rock I knew I could rely on. Did a few self vaginal exams and could feel Zachary’s head progressing downwards.
    At about 8.20am I realised I was in transition, his head was crowning and I wasn’t fully dilated. Was upset and freaked out but Alicia reminded me to trust in my body. Took a deep breath and focused on opening my cervix up. A few minutes later I was ready to push, Zachary came out head first with a hand. I rested for a few seconds till the next contractions came and looked up at Jed and said “Are you ready? He is coming.” Jed caught Zachary Francis McKenna at 8.38am
    We were both ecstatic and sat there admiring for a while. He started crying almost immediately and looked around at all of us.
    Stood up and tried to birth placenta but couldn’t so I went back to the room. He started feeding soon after and I was enjoying his skin to skin contact. The doctor arrived soon after he advised us to clamp the cord and get the placenta out.
    Jed was frantic and really wanted the placenta out because he was worried about bleeding. I was getting a little annoyed by his constant fussing. We clamped the cord and Jed cut it. The doctor applied gentle traction and got the placenta out. Finally we were left alone for some quiet time.

    I would like to thank my lovely husband for supporting me through the pregnancy and birth and agreeing to a home birth and studying so hard.
    I would also like to thank Melissa and Julie for their teachings which allowed me to have the confidence to do this, although neither of them endorsed free birthing they were not judgmental.

    No amount of thank you can express my gratitude for having Alicia around to show me there were many options and that we need to take charge of our own births.
    Many thanks to my Mom and Dad for allowing me to use their house. Last of all, Thank You to all the women out there who shared their birth stories and experiences which gave me to determination to birth at home.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Delivering better maternity care

    Link

    Despite countless inquiries, initiatives and ministerial pledges … maternity care remains one of the NHS’s problem areas …

    In recent weeks there have been two significant pieces of evidence published that will help shape practice affecting the UK’s 800,000 births a year. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) produced new guidelines for the NHS in England and Wales on the circumstances in which mothers-to-be should be able to have a Caesarean-section delivery.

    Meanwhile the landmark Birthplace study … sought to clarify the relative risks of having a baby at home, in hospital or in a birth centre run by midwives; the study found all settings carried a low level of risk. Both documents aim to advise maternity teams on how to give mothers and their babies the best possible experience.

    … It is no wonder maternity services are under pressure … England has had a 22% increase in births over the past decade …

    But the maternity workforce is not just short of midwives, the roundtable heard. Of those 800,000 annual births, 94% of them take place in hospitals where doctors are present along with midwives; the others, at home (2%) and in birth centres (4%), have midwives solely in charge. But the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) believes the 2,186 senior doctors working as consultants in that area of medicine is too few. It wants the NHS to boost numbers to 3,000-3,300.

    Mothers-to-be would benefit because every hospital maternity unit would have a consultant on hand 24/7 and less experienced doctors would no longer be in charge overnight and at weekends …

    … “the current system of maternity care is unsustainable. You have to reconfigure”. The participant meant that some maternity units should be closed – merged, in effect – so fewer, larger childbirth centres could offer mothers a better service, partly thanks to more specialist staff handling a greater number of deliveries concentrated in the same place.

    It makes little sense for large urban areas to have separate maternity units just a few miles apart, a view confirmed for the speaker by seeing that sort of setup on a recent visit to Leeds and nearby towns.

    Many health professionals support the concept of reorganisation. And the reconfiguration of neonatal care services in 2003, which led to fewer units dealing with sick babies but offering enhanced care, is a potential model to follow, another participant added. But there is a major obstacle to overcome first: … To close your core maternity service is a death trap as an MP. So that will not happen,” …

    … simply creating fewer, but larger, hospital units is not the answer and there needs to be more midwife-led birth centres, either standalone units or situated beside hospitals, in case a mother needs urgent medical attention …

    There was also a strong consensus that the huge proportion of births occurring in hospitals, 94%, is too high. While there was support for moving towards an equal split – 33% at home, 33% in birth centres and 33% in hospital – there was also a recognition that politics, entrenched attitudes and the tightest NHS budget in a generation means that will probably remain just an aspiration for the foreseeable future.

    … In 2007, Maternity Matters promised women in England a choice of birth place, but the reality is that many still do not get that. One participant working on the NHS frontline said pressure on maternity services was so great in some places that midwives who usually help women to have home births are having to work, instead, on labour wards, thus depriving those seeking a home birth of that supposedly guaranteed right.

    Similarly, surveys by the Healthcare Commission and its successor as the NHS regulator for England, the Care Quality Commission, have shown the promise to women of one-to-one care from a midwife during their labour is also not honoured for as many as a quarter of mothers-to-be, who are left alone and find it stressful …

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    NC Women Face Charges After Newborn’s Death

    Link

    Two women have been charged with practicing midwifery without a license in North Carolina after a newborn died following an underwater home birth.

    … Charlotte police say the women were at a private home last week assisting with an underwater birth, in which the baby is delivered in a tub of warm water … there were complications with the delivery, and the newborn died after being rushed to a local hospital.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Couple threaten legal action to ensure homebirth service; hospital engages private midwives for homebirth service

    Link

    Bosses at Whipps Cross University Hospital have decided to reinstate its home births service after a couple threatened legal action.

    The cash-strapped hospital in Leytonstone announced earlier this month that it would be impossible to provide midwives to households from December 18 for up to six weeks due to staff shortages.

    But now … extra funding has been made available to pay for an independent midwife service for those who were hit by the sudden suspension.

    Adam and Michelle Boult … were planning to have a home birth in January and were so outraged by the hospital’s plan to stop the service they called in a barrister, who argued the hospital had a legal responsibility to support them.

    Mr Boult, a 32-year-old journalist, said: “While they would probably deny it, to get them to agree to this has taken an extraordinary amount of pressure.

    “We were lucky enough to have a very helpful barrister and solicitor who have pushed for the Trust to reconsider its stance, culminating in Whipps Cross receiving a pre-action letter suggesting a judicial review”.

    … In a joint statement, Whipps Cross and ONEL said: “[We] are committed to offering all women in the local area the best possible choice of how and where they give birth.

    “We have been working together to find a way to offer a home birth service during the next four weeks. Safety is our priority, and we did have some concerns about staffing levels over this period.

    “However, by working together, the hospital and NHS ONEL are now able to bring in independent midwives for this limited period, until the hospital’s Home Birth Service team is in place.

    “This means those women who asked for a home birth in the next four weeks can have one. We have always been committed to developing the Home Birth Service and to ensuring we provide high quality, safe and consistent services to all women.”

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Unassisted: Home Birth in Nebraska

    Link

    … Birth is big business to a healthcare industry … Hospitals are reinventing themselves to create an atmosphere catering to a woman’s evolving needs. However, some Nebraska women want to take their business out of the hospital altogether, but find their choice may not be a legally viable option.

    Methodist Women’s Hospital … sits just off the interstate in Elkhorn. The modern, two-building facility is a “one-stop shop” for women’s health. Women-centered facilities are not a new concept in the health care industry, but resorting back to a more home-like and natural birth experience is … the hospital’s new labor and delivery rooms … are as “home-like” as they can get.

    … a lot more women are asking for natural birth plans lately, meaning births with limited medical interferences such as epidurals, labor inducing medications, and cesarean sections. After our tour, I asked Korth about the most natural of birth plans: the home birth.

    “We feel like we’ve done a very good job as getting as close to that as we possibly can,” she said …

    But, there are some Nebraska couples who feel a hospital will never replace the comfort of home …

    “I’m terrified of hospitals,” laughed Katie. And she knows hospitals, Katie works at one in Omaha and her husband, John, is a paramedic.

    “It’s just an uncomfortable environment, I think,” she said. “From the bed you’re in, to the room that you’re in, to multiple people coming in and out, in and out, not necessarily telling you what they’re doing or what’s going on—they’re just doing it. It’s just so impersonal…I’m just afraid of that.”

    The couple is not expecting just yet, but is looking at their options. They prefer an assisted home birth with a … Midwife, but they will face some difficult choices in their planning. The birth experience they want is also an illegal one. Nebraska is one of two states where an assisted home birth attended by a … Midwife is prohibited. Alabama is the second.

    Katie fears the professional and personal implications of having a home birth.

    “I would fear for my job if I had a home birth,” she said. “But it is scary, the thought of doing it, not just my job, but with my family and society and the view of what that means.”

    John said he’s also unsure of the professional implications he could face. He hasn’t told any of his paramedic instructors about their plans, but only one co-worker because he said he trusts her.

    … If Katie decides on a home birth, it would be difficult to find a … Midwife willing to help. The penalties for an attending midwife can range from license revocation to jail time.

    … Prentice is the owner of the WomanKind Midwifery, located in … South Dakota … She never delivers in Nebraska, but says Nebraska mothers from as far southeast as Lincoln drive hours, or days, to see her. She said these women are “desperate” to have a different type of natural birth.

    Speaking from her office in Spearfish, Jeanne said, “They want a different experience, they don’t want to be induced, they don’t want an epidural, they don’t want to be flat on their back with a monitor. They want something different. They want that personal care. And they can’t get it in their home state.”

    Prentice said the atmosphere that compels women to drive hundreds of miles can never be replicated in a hospital setting. Hospitals are meant to treat disease … something she sternly added pregnancy is not. And as for the new home-like atmospheres, Prentice isn’t buying it. She feels hospitals are quick to perform interventions, sometimes unnecessarily, breaking the tranquility of an otherwise quiet room.

    “You can put nice Pergo floor in and you can hide your equipment, but the minute things look a little or feel a little scary to you, you drag that stuff out,” …

    … Back in Elkhorn, Certified Nurse Midwife, Marilyn Lowe is one of four CNMs who make up Methodist’s new Midwifery Department. Lowe says a natural birth doesn’t have to take place outside of a hospital. After a full day of seeing patients, Lowe spoke with me after hours in her office.

    “Birth is a philosophy,” Lowe said. “And it can be as natural in a hospital as it can be in a home. Our goal is to help that woman accomplish what she wants to accomplish.”

    “We also have patients who want epidurals,” she said. “But if somebody wants a natural birth, that is our goal to help them accomplish that with as little intervention, but yet knowing if we need that intervention, it’s available.”

    … But for Katie and John, not having the option of an attended home birth leaves them feeling unsafe and frustrated. Katie is perplexed at the notion that they can deliver themselves, but not with a trained professional.

    “For me I want to have a home birth, but I don’t wanna just be by myself at home popping out a kid,” she said. “What if something goes wrong?”

    “My biggest frustration is that I can have a home birth, me and my husband can have our kid at home, but we can’t have somebody who’s trained to be there with us.”

    … Tony Fulton of Lincoln wants to repeal a single line in Nebraska’s medical laws: the one prohibiting … Midwives from attending home births …

    Fulton was approached by Nebraska mothers asking for his help years ago … “For them to be stigmatized as strange or awkward, it’s the ultimate of ironies because these are moms,” … “And often times the stigmas are being foisted upon them by those who are not moms.”

    Jessica Freeman is a mother of three and a board member of Nebraska Friends of Midwives. During her first pregnancy, she said like most newly expectant mothers, she had read many books on child birth. But when it came time to deliver, she said she experienced interventions by hospital staff she felt might not be safe.

    Her doctor broke her water, and told her to push, an urge, Freeman said, she never had.

    “I came out feeling… just not sure what I was doing,” Freeman said. … And that translates into your mothering.”

    That experience led Freeman to seek out a home birth for her next two children. Her first home birth was performed in New York, and despite the ban, her second was in Nebraska. For that birth, Freeman imported a midwife from New York*. (*Correction: the imported midwife was not from New York, but was imported from another state)

    “We’re not looking for 50 percent of births to be in the home,” she said. “We’re just saying we want the ones who know about home birth, want to be able to have a safe home birth, we want to be able to have an attendant there, to make sure nothing goes terribly wrong, and to help us if something does go wrong.”

    … Sarah Jacobitz-Kizzier is in her final year as a University of Nebraska Medical Center student. She’s planning to become a family physician. I asked her why she believes the medical community is resistant to allow home births. She said it’s a “fear of lawsuits, losing their own medical license …

    … in medical school, the practice of home birth is never brought up. And often, she said, the topic was “taboo” with fellow med students. She said she feels women should have as many options as they want. And she said there are widespread misconceptions about women who want home births.

    “The one that is most polarizing and the most untrue, is … that women who choose to do home births are labeled as having a stronger emphasis on the process of the birth rather than the outcome …

    … “Virtually every other state allows this except Nebraska,” he said. “Either Nebraska is going to be the safest place on the planet to have babies, or it’s going to stick out like a sore thumb.”

    No matter how “home-like” the hospital delivery suite is, it will never be like home. There is something about being in your own private, comfortable and familiar space, using your own shower / kitchen / lounge room, eating off your own plates and being surrounded by what you know, that can never be replicated by a hospital. Of course, some women will be safer birthing in the hospital, but wherever possible, I believe women should be encouraged and supported to birth at home.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Midwives Use Rituals To Send Message That Women’s Bodies Know Best

    Link

    In reaction to what midwives view as the overly medicalized way hospitals deliver babies, they have created birthing rituals to send the message that women’s bodies know best.

    The midwife experience uses these rituals to send the message that home birth is about female empowerment, strengthening relationships between family and friends, and facilitating participatory experiences that put mothers in control, with the ultimate goal of safe and healthy deliveries less focused on technological intervention.

    These are some of the findings from an Oregon State University researcher and licensed midwife who witnessed more than 400 home births in order to document an extensive list of practices utilized by midwives to express the symbolic difference between home and hospital births.

    … “We know, for instance, that midwives have better health outcomes in some areas, such as reduced rates of surgical delivery and labor induction, than hospitals. But I wanted to examine how ritual might play a part in producing these positive health outcomes.”

    … evidence shows that hospital births result in about triple the rate of cesarean section for low-risk women compared to midwife-attended home births …

    What she found was a network of common practices, messages and beliefs that resulted in midwives constructing woman-centered rituals around pregnancy and birth that were set up in opposition to what they believe are the overly medicalized practices of hospitals.

    For instance … midwives conducted many of the same diagnostic procedures as a physician would prenatally, from blood pressure and weight checks to blood testing and fetal heart tone evaluation …

    … “Many midwives also downplayed the centrality of monitoring and resuscitation equipment setting them off to the side, or placing them under baby blankets during labor so women would not be reminded of the technology in the room. Mothers and babies were still monitored closely, but the monitoring was not made the central focus.”

    The differences aren’t so much in practice … but in performance.

    Cheyney also documented the use of common phrases to create birthing mantras. She lists phrases such as “don’t fight it,” “let your body do it,” “open,” and “let it be strong,” as key components … Many mothers … reported feeling strong and capable during their labors, and women who compared their hospital birth to their home birth reported feeling like they were “doing something, rather than just lying there passively waiting.” Midwives also commonly expressed the statement that they were simply “guardians,” and that women have all the tools inside of them to birth their own babies.

    … It is Cheyney’s belief that both of these sets of rituals have caused a wide chasm between … hospital births and the 1 percent who choose home births.

    “Just as women and their doctors who deliver in the hospital often feel convinced that their birth was the only safe and ‘correct’ way, women and midwives who deliver at home feel strongly that they have the solution,” … “They believe it with every cell in their body because they have lived it.”…

    There is definitely something special and unique about homebirth that cannot be summarised in words alone.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Low-risk births don’t need hospital

    Link

    A new study in England shows little difference in complications among the babies of women with low-risk pregnancies who delivered in hospitals versus those who gave birth with midwives at home or in birthing centers.

    … home births are advisable only when there are low risk factors. If the patient has … [medical] conditions, is about to deliver twins, or has high blood pressure or hypertension, home births aren’t recommended …

    “Home birth can be just as safe as hospital birth if people are providing it to the correct patient appropriately,” …

    … “Birth isn’t an abnormal process, it’s a physiological process,” he said. “And if your pregnancy and labor is not complicated, then you don’t need a high level of specific expertise.”
    … about 50 percent of pregnant women in England — those who are low-risk — should be able to choose where to have their baby.

    More than 90 percent of pregnant women in England now give birth in a hospital. Some officials say the new study should prompt women to consider alternatives.

    … midwife-run birth centers in England have a more homelike environment, with privacy, sofas and birthing pools.

    In Britain, midwives deliver more than 60 percent of babies already. Similar care is provided in the Netherlands, where about a quarter of all births happen at home …

    … researchers found a higher risk for first-time mothers planning a home birth. Among those women, there were 9.3 adverse events per 1,000 births, including babies with brain damage due to labor problems and stillbirth. That compared to 5.3 adverse events per 1,000 births for those planning a hospital birth …

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Home Births – Then And Now

    Link

    A comparison of home-birth trends of the 1970s finds many similarities – and some differences – related to current trends in home births.

    … in the 1970s – as now – women opting to engage in home births tended to have higher levels of education … in the late 1970s, one third of the group’s members participating in home births had a bachelor’s, master’s or doctoral degree. Fewer than one percent did not have a high school education.

    Also, according to the 2,000 respondents to HOME’s 1978 survey, 36 percent of women engaging in home births at the time were attended by physicians. That is a much higher percentage than is the case currently for mothers participating in home births. (In research by Eugene Declerq, Boston University School of Public Health, and Mairi Breen Rothman, Metro Area Midwives and Allied Services, it was found that about five percent of homebirths were attended by a physician in 2008.)

    … The debate surrounding health, safety and home births rose to national prominence as recently as October 2011 during the Home Birth Consensus Summit in Virginia, held because of increasing interest in home births as an option for expectant mothers.

    Overall, Kline’s research of HOME and of ACOG counters the stereotypical view of the 1970s home-birth movement as countercultural and peopled by “hippies.” In fact, the founders of HOME deliberately reached out to a broad cross section of women across the political and religious spectrum, including religious conservatives as well as those on the left of the political spectrum.

    … “In looking through the historical record, we find that many women involved in home births in the 1970s signed their names ‘Mrs. Robert Smith’ or ‘Mrs. William Hoffman.’ The movement included professionals, business people, farmers, laborers and artists. It defies simplistic categorization.”

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Mums seek homebirth funding

    Link

    ALI Hookham of Lismore is due to give birth in five days.

    The 28-year-old would prefer to give birth at home but like many North Coast mothers Ms Hookham cannot afford to hire a private midwife.

    … Ms Hookham is one of more than 200 women who have signed a petition calling for a publicly-funded homebirth program on the North Coast.

    “The community has been waiting, they know it needs to be done and we’re keen to hear about their progress,” she said.

    But Northern NSW Local Health District chief executive Chris Crawford denied they had been slow to respond to calls for publicly funded homebirths.

    … “We are always influenced by the fact that a particular proposal has community support but we have to be conscious of the safety of the mother, the safety of staff and potential liability issues,” he said.

    Medicare funding is available for care with some private midwives, and this funding assists with the pregnancy and postnatal care of women who are planning a homebirth. Some private health funds will also cover the cost of the birth.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Hospital births for healthy women? What does the research say?

    The recent Birthplace Study was the first of its kind to compare outcomes for low-risk, healthy women who gave birth in midwife-led units (both alongside and freestanding), obstetric units and at home. My previous blog post described the findings for first-time Mums birthing at home, but what did the findings say about hospital birth?

    The study is extremely positive and shows that birth is generally very safe for mothers and babies who are low risk and healthy. In fact, the chance of something going very wrong for the baby was so low that the researchers had to combine mortality and morbidity to get any meaningful data. There were so few deaths in the study (38 out of nearly 65,000 births) that they had to combine a host of adverse outcomes in order to come up with any statistically significant results. Therefore the “primary outcome” included baby deaths and serious morbidity (injury / illness) to the baby. Overall, a low risk woman had a 4.3/1,000 risk of having a “primary outcome” (that is, death or serious injury to the baby). For women birthing in hospital, the figure was 4.4/1,000 and was actually lower for babies born at home and in midwifery-led units. Imagine that: the risk to the baby overall was highest in hospital!

    Breaking this down further, if we look at first-time Mums separately to second and subsequent time Mums, the figures look different. First time Mums had a 5.3/1,000 chance of a “primary outcome” overall. This rose to 9.3/1,000 for women who planned to birth at home, and fell to 4.5 for women birthing in a midwifery-led unit. It was 5.3/1,000 for first-time mums who birthed in hospital. Again, we see that hospital birth confers some increased risk for first time Mums.

    Now looking at women birthing for the second (or subsequent) time, we find that the overall risk of a “primary outcome” was very low: 3.1/1,000. This was higher in an obstetric (hospital) unit at 3.3/1,000, lower in a midwifery-led unit (2.7/1,000) and lowest for women birthing at home (2.3/1,000). So once again, the study is showing that hospital is not the safest place to birth a baby if you are a low-risk, healthy women.

    If you are having your first baby and are low-risk, the safest place to birth is in a midwifery unit, and if you have birthed before and are low-risk, the safest place to birth is at home.

    Of course, midwifery units have limited capabilities to provide higher levels of care, and as labour and birth are unpredictable, there needs to be robust transfer arrangements in place. Some 10-45% of women transfer in birth. This figure is lowest for women who have birthed before, and highest in first-time Mums. As well as robust transfer arrangements, women – particularly first-time Mums – need to be aware of the chance of transfer and to be comfortable with this possibility. This is best accommodated if the woman can transfer in with her own midwife.

    What were the intervention rates like?

    Not surprisingly, intervention rates were highest in women who planned a hospital birth. 93% women who planned a homebirth had a normal birth, versus only 74% women in the hospital. 11% had a caesarean in the obstetric (hospital) unit, versus a mere 2.8% in women who planned a home birth. 24% women had their labours sped up with a syntocinon drip in the planned hospital birth group, versus only 5% in the women who planned a homebirth. 31% women had an epidural in the planned hospital birth group, versus 8% at home. And of course, episiotomy rates were lowest at home.

    It is clear that being in hospital greatly increases risks for all low risk mothers compared to being at home or in a midwife led unit (either alongside or freestanding).

    It is clear that low-risk women have much to gain by planning a birth with midwives in a birth centre or some other form of midwifery-led care. Planned homebirth does increase the risks to the babies of first-time Mums, with an increase in adverse outcomes for babies from about 0.5% to just under 1%. But what is it about planning a homebirth that increases the risk to the baby? The study used intention to treat analysis, so we are not able to know how many of those adverse outcomes occurred in those who transferred to hospital after a planned homebirth, versus those that happened in the births that actually occurred at home. We do know that the outcomes of homebirth transfers are generally worse than those who had been planned to occur in hospital, and first-time Mums are more likely to transfer. We also know that birth is generally riskier for a first-time Mum than a woman who has birthed before.

    Regardless, the study is extremely positive in supporting the role of primary midwifery care and the excellent outcomes that low-risk women can achieve when they choose a midwife as their care provider. Imagine the benefits as well for high-risk women who receive midwifery care with appropriate and timely obstetric care.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Homebirth for first-time Mums: what does the research say?

    Link

    …Homebirth carries a higher risk for the babies of first-time mothers, according to a landmark study published in the British Medical Journal.

    However, the chance of harm to the baby is still under 1% …

    For a second birth there was no difference in the risk to babies between home, a midwife-led unit or a doctor-led hospital unit.

    Midwife-led care was in general much more likely to lead to a natural birth.

    The Birthplace study is the largest carried out into the safety of different maternity settings – comparing births at home, in midwife-led units attached to hospitals, those that are stand-alone and doctor-led hospital units.

    All the women followed had healthy pregnancies and began labour with no known risk factors.

    It found that, overall, birth is very safe wherever it happens.

    The rates of complications, including stillbirth or other problems affecting the baby, was 5.3 per 1,000 births in hospital compared with 9.3 per 1,000 home births (for women having their first baby).

    Rate of complications for first-borns per 1,000

    Stand-alone midwife unit – 4.5
    Hospital midwife unit – 4.7
    Hospital – 5.3
    Home – 9.3

    … About 45% of women planning to have their first baby at home were transferred during labour, although this was mainly because of delays in giving birth and the need for an epidural pain-relief injection, rather than because the baby was in distress.

    Rates of normal birth

    60% hospital obstetric unit
    76% hospital midwife unit
    83% freestanding midwife unit
    90% home

    The transfer itself was not thought to be responsible for the difference because there was no raised risk for women moved from stand-alone midwife units to hospital during labour.

    There was no difference in risk when women were having their second baby, whether that was at home, in a midwife unit or a traditional hospital setting.

    The rate of transfer from home to hospital was much lower too, at just 12% (for women having their second and subsequent babies).

    … [This study] reveals an unexplained difference in the rate of normal birth between units run by midwives and those run by doctors. The disparity on emergency Caesarean sections is particularly striking. It suggests a different culture in the way midwives and doctors see birth, with doctors concerned about risks and midwives focused on normality.

    … this research should drive an an expansion in midwife-led care, either at birth centres or at home for the half of women expected to have a low-risk birth.

    … The research also confirms that midwife-led care is much more likely to lead to a normal birth – without any interventions, including forceps or ventouse.

    That was true whether the baby was born at home or in a midwife-led unit.

    The emergency Caesarean rate for the low-risk women in the study was 11% in doctor-led units compared with only 2.8% at home, and 4.4% in a midwife led unit on a hospital site.

    … “Where a woman needs an emergency Caesarean section for their first birth, they will not be regarded as low risk for the next birth, and won’t have the choice of going outside a medically-led unit.”

    The Key Findings of the study:

    Giving birth is generally very safe

    For ‘low risk’ women, the incidence of adverse perinatal outcomes (intrapartum stillbirth, early neonatal death, neonatal encephalopathy, meconium aspiration syndrome, and specified birth related injuries including brachial plexus injury) was low (4.3 events per 1000 births).

    Midwifery units appear to be safe for the baby and offer benefits for the mother

    … there were no significant difference in adverse perinatal outcomes compared with planned birth in an obstetric unit.

    Women who planned birth in a midwifery unit … had significantly fewer interventions, including substantially fewer intrapartum caesarean sections, and more ‘normal births’ than women who planned birth in an obstetric unit.

    For women having a second or subsequent baby, home births and midwifery unit births appear to be safe for the baby and offer benefits for the mother

    For multiparous women, there were no significant differences in adverse perinatal outcomes between planned home births or midwifery unit births and planned births in obstetric units.

    For multiparous women, birth in a non-obstetric unit setting significantly and substantially reduced the odds of having an intrapartum caesarean section, instrumental delivery or episiotomy.

    For women having a first baby, a planned home birth increases the risk for the baby

    For nulliparous women, there were 9.3 adverse perinatal outcome events per 1000 planned home births compared with 5.3 per 1000 births for births planned in obstetric units, and this finding was statistically significant.

    For women having a first baby, there is a fairly high probability of transferring to an obstetric unit during labour or immediately after the birth

    For nulliparous women, the peri-partum transfer rate was 45% for planned home births, 36% for planned FMU births and 40% for planned AMU births

    For women having a second or subsequent baby, the transfer rate is around 10%

    For women having a second or subsequent baby, the proportion of women transferred to an obstetric unit during labour or immediately after the birth was 12% for planned home births, 9% for planned FMU births and 13% for planned AMU births.

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Doctors claim homebirth risks ignored

    Link

    WA doctors have attacked a new policy for State Government-funded homebirths, saying it sidesteps serious concerns about the increased risk of newborn deaths.

    The draft document says women have a right to choose a home delivery at taxpayers’ expense provided they are at low risk of complications and give their consent.

    But women with risk factors such as a previous caesarean, obesity or a history of blood loss in childbirth should be excluded from publicly funded homebirths.

    … Australian Medical Association WA said the policy fudged serious concerns raised by former members of the committee, who found the risk of death in babies born at home was almost four times higher and called for funded homebirth to be banned.

    “Not only is the taxpayer entitled to think public monies are going to things that are evidence-based, if the evidence suggests it’s more dangerous they should have even greater concerns.” …

    The WA homebirth policy is a very considered and thorough document that supports low-risk homebirth for women who are attended by experienced midwives with a back-up hospital booking and obstetric consultation. Unfortunately the doctors quoted in the above article seem to have mixed their research. Studies clearly demonstrate that low-risk homebirth is at least as safe as hospital birth, and with fewer interventions for mothers in labour. It is high risk homebirth that is associated with excess perinatal mortality and this is not supported under the WA policy, or any other publicly-funded homebirth programs.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Turbulent times

    A lot has been happening in the world of homebirth and midwifery. Many will have read the articles about homebirth, freebirth, midwives and maternity care that are appearing in our papers on a daily basis.

    I have not posted for a couple of weeks now, for three main reasons: one I have been really busy with my practice which has not been this busy for about two years. Second, I attended the Australian College of Midwives National Conference – the ACM worked really hard to deliver an excellent conference that was appreciated by all. I had the fantastic opportunity to meet midwives from around Australia and share ideas, discuss practice and talk birthy things. I was pleased that the conference was in Sydney, because as those of you who know me will know, in my non-midwifery life I rescue and care for injured and orphaned native birds, and so I was able to make a trip home most days of the conference to feed everyone at home. They were hungry but they all survived! I digress. The third reason for not posting was that the recent issues have made me re-assess things like responsibility, accountability, safety, choice, control, autonomy, beneficence, informed decision-making and many other issues. I have no answers to report. Just lots of reflection.

    Midwifery and maternity care are going through turbulent times and as professionals and organisations, I feel that we have done a major disservice to women that they feel safer birthing at home – with or without a registered midwife – in the presence of risk factors – because they so strongly believe that the hospital system will not enable them to birth in the manner of their choosing. It is a sad reflection on the health system and the professionals who work within it. Women who cannot access midwifery care because they are planning a VBAC. Women who are told that if they insist on birthing vaginally with twins, they must accept continuous monitoring, induction, epidural and birth in stirrups for twin two. Women whose only option is to birth in a hospital that is two hours from their home. We have all heard the stories.

    My biggest disappointment is the lack of midwife admitting rights. We are one year into the maternity reforms on November 1 this year. We have eligible midwives with Medicare provider numbers, ordering tests and working with doctors to provide safe care to women and babies – yet we cannot access hospitals to provide this care. I well understand that there are a lot of hurdles to be overcome with midwife admitting rights, and life has taught me that nothing in life is impossible.

    The release of the homebirth position statement – which I fully support as an evidence-based and safe way to provide care – combined with the lack of midwife admitting rights, is disastrous for women and midwives. Higher risk women are forced into a position of birthing in hospital without their midwife if the midwife complies with the position statement but has no admitting rights – otr else freebirthing, potentially with disastrous consequences. Overnight, this change occurred and women are fuming.

    It is impossible to believe, but an eligible midwife who crosses all the “T”s and dots all the “I”s will suffer incredibly in terms of restriction of clientele, however if she were to remove her name from the register – something that I understand is very easy to do – she may do just as she pleases with no accountability, regulation or practice standards. Midwives are placed in the untenable situation of a dwindling practice, or unregistering and having a flourishing practice. Until admitting rights are in place, midwives will have no place to birth with their higher-risk clients. This situation does not see the Government supporting midwives or women. It is creating a disaster.

    The various politics of homebirth and midwifery has created an enormous rift between midwives. It seems that there are the bunch who have elected to become eligible, forge ahead with collaborative arrangements, push for admitting rights and accept the increased regulation that is upon us as our profession matures. The other group opposes the increased regulation and restriction of choice, supports midwife- (or non-midwife)-attended homebirth for any woman who wants it and really wants things to just go back to how they used to be, before insurance became mandatory. Many midwives sit comfortable in the middle of this debate. It is sad to watch such division and animosity amongst midwives. We seem to lack a capacity of saying, “We don’t share each other’s vision and we have made different choices, but we are midwives and we will support each other”. As one midwife said to me, “We are each doing the best we can for the women we care for and we’re making the best of a rotten situation”.

    I know 2012 will be better than 2011. Who knows? Maybe it’ll be an historic year where for the very first time, women will birth on their own terms, with their chosen midwife, at home or in hospital. I wonder how many women will insist on homebirth in spite of significant risks, if they are able to birth in hospital with their own midwife and in the manner of their choosing.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Natural birth in hospital?

    Here are some ideas to birth naturally in hospital:

    Read, read, read. Books, websites, any written info from your care provider … read it all. You also need to know the difference between facts presented to you in an honest and unbiased way, and facts that are being filtered through hospital policy. This is where women benefit from having a private midwife by their side.

    For example, “Some risks rise slightly when a woman has high blood pressure. I am uncomfortable with letting your pregnancy continue with high blood pressure because of the risks to the baby and to you if something happens” is an honest and factual statement. You have the right to accept the risks and refuse induction. However, some women hear “I’m going to induce you today because if we don’t do this now, there is a good chance your baby will not make it”. This statement is dishonest, using a woman’s fears and her maternal instinct to encourage her to accept intervention. There is also no discussion of alternative options. Informed consent requires that women are presented with options so that they can make the best decision for them, in their situation.

    Be assertive As with most human relationships, a great deal can be resolved with a calm, respectful and firm manner. Know what you want and why you want it. Engage a private midwife to assist you with obtaining relevant and impartial information.

    Listen. If you are choosing to use a hospital and an obstetrician for your birth, then you acknowledge that their presence, education and experience have some value. Your wishes are important but be willing to listen even when what’s being said is really not what you want to hear. You must also acknowledge that an obstetrician is trained in all things that go wrong, and they are on the look-out for any sign of things going wrong. Midwives, on the other hand, will promote normalcy and assist your pregnancy and birth to remain normal. These differing philosophies do result in big differences in intervention rates.

    Be Flexible. Understand that sometimes things don’t go the way we had planned. There might be some occasions where you’ll be happy to accommodate the hospital policy, and other times when you’ll want to stand your ground.

    Ultimately, it is true that the most important aspect of birth is safety and a healthy mother and baby. But that doesn’t mean the other aspects are unimportant, and I firmly believe you can have a great birth – and a safe birth – in any location.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Choosing Your Midwife

    Midwives are qualified and educated to care for women throughout normal pregnancy, birth and the postnatal / newborn period. Midwives are also known as the experts in natural birth, attending water births, home births and hospital births. Finding the best midwife for your needs can be a challenging task, but it’s one of the most important decisions a family will make when they decide to work with a midwife. The midwife’s knowledge, skill and experience are key to a safe and satisfying pregnancy and birth experience.

    When engaging the services of a private midwife, most people will make contact by phone call or email, and then arrange for an initial consultation. At the consultation, the midwife and family interview each other to explore whether the relationship feels right for them and meets their needs. Midwives will ask about the woman’s health history, her care needs, her previous birth experiences, her attitudes and beliefs about birth and her expectations of her midwife.

    What sorts of questions can women ask their midwife? Well, there are lots of questions you could ask and I’ve included some below.

    Be sure to ask about qualifications and experience, including whether your midwife is an eligible midwife. You are able to claim medicare benefits if your eligible midwife has a collaborative arrangement and is able to access obstetric care for you if it becomes necessary. If you are told, “I have three years of experience” ask where that experience was obtained – in a hospital? Private practice? If in private practice, how many births does she attend a year? 2? 20? Generally for private practice, the more experience that is gained, the better: when a midwife works in private practice, she works alone and needs a good level of skill, experience and judgment to practice safely. Experience is always the best teacher.

    Ask your midwife about her relationships with hospitals and doctors. This will provide insight into your midwife’s ability to negotiate and communicate.

    Many women ask for references but this can be tricky as they would come from former clients of your midwife. This of course brings up issues of confidentiality, and it is against the Public Health Act for midwives to place testimonials on their websites. You can ask your midwife if she has any former clients who would be prepared to speak with you, but be mindful of confidentiality processes and women’s rights to privacy. What your midwife can do, is to provide a summary of the feedback that she has received from her clients. This will tell you that your midwife is engaged in quality assurance processes and would also provide a way of reading feedback from previous clients.

    Ask your midwife what her service includes and does not include. Also ask about fees, back-up arrangements and obstetric back-up arrangements.

    Are there any questions families should not ask their midwife? Generally, interviews with midwives can be approached as a job interview. Questions that are appropriate in a job interview would be fine to ask your prospective midwife. Questions regarding religion, marital status, age, previous birth experiences, previous terminations and other personal questions ought not be asked.

    Finally, it’s really important that you feel comfortable with your midwife and that you feel that you trust her. Reliability is important, as is trust, respect and honesty.

    Melissa Maimann, Essential Birth Consulting 0400 418 448

    Charging women for non-medical caesareans?

    Link

    The health minister has said that women in Northern Ireland who choose to have a Caesarean for non-medical reasons may have to pay for the operation.

    Edwin Poots is launching a consultation on a review of maternity services.

    Women at low risk will be encouraged to consider having their baby in a midwife-led unit or at home, if appropriate.

    Around 30% of deliveries are by Caesarean section – the highest level in the UK and Ireland.

    … giving birth was a natural process and superb assistance was available to help women through the delivery.

    “It costs several thousand pounds more for a Caesarean section so there are savings to be made,” …

    “… what we want to encourage, is more people to give birth naturally because it has better outcomes for the mother and the baby.

    … “We want to ensure that people take the natural choice where they can and to have that back up where they need Caesarean section to take place.”

    … At present, women who elect to go private to have a Caesarean on non-medical grounds pay for their pre and post-natal care.

    But the cost of the delivery is met by the health service.

    … women will be encouraged to have their baby in a midwife led unit

    “If you want to go down that route, if you want to pay for it, it is totally up to yourself, but I don’t feel that we the public in Northern Ireland should be paying additional money for people to have the choice.”

    The minister said he expected to see a “considerable” number of midwifery units being established.

    “A lot of them would be set up in association with the main maternity unit, so they would be on the same site as existing hospitals,” …

    “Women would be giving birth totally with the midwives but there would be a fallback position of having an obstetrician nearby if things do not work out.”

    Breedagh Hughes from the Royal College of Midwives said the focus was on trying to “normalise” child birth.

    … “One of the things we hope will come out in the review will be asking trusts to look at … the reasons for the Caesarean sections and to focus on trying to prevent women from having that first Caesarean section, which very often leads to the old adage – ‘once a section always a section’.”

    She said a “fear” of child birth stopped many women from choosing a natural birth.

    “When one in every three women gives birth by Caesarean section, you lose that critical mass of people who know what it is like to give birth normally, and women are losing confidence in their own body’s ability to give birth,” she said.

    Ms Hughes also welcomed proposals to shift the focus to midwife led care.

    “I think if women are given the opportunity to get to know and trust their midwife and to trust their own bodies, we’re more likely to see women saying, ‘OK, this is what nature intended me for and this is what I’m going to do’,” …

    Visit my website to explore birthing services

    Los Angeles Midwife, Gets Probation For Delivering Baby

    Link

    Katharine McCall found herself in a tough spot … four years ago as she tended to a woman in labor. The student midwife said she was unable to reach a licensed supervisor, so … she delivered the baby.

    Her actions and her intentions were contested in a criminal case … where a judge sentenced McCall to three years of probation …

    Midwifery has been controversial in the United States … Ten states prohibit the profession …

    Brietta Clark, a professor at Loyola Law School, said there’s a movement among mothers who want to give birth outside of hospitals. She said she understood why McCall was charged, because the medical board wants to ensure people are receiving safe services and advised properly.

    “People don’t have a good sense of what complications there may be,” Clark said. “The licensing of midwives makes sure people are trained to respect the holistic aspect while having a trained eye.”

    In McCall’s case, a complaint was made to the California Medical Board about a November 2007 delivery in which the baby’s shoulder was stuck and the mother suffered a vaginal tear. Although the mother and baby recovered fully, McCall was charged and found guilty last month of one count of practicing medicine without a license.

    Superior Court Judge Stephen Marcus said while McCall used very poor judgment and she appeared to be motivated by money, she has had no problems with any other births since she received her license last year.

    “Delivering babies is a serious business,” Marcus said. “I don’t accept that Ms. McCall had a right or an obligation to deliver a baby without a licensed midwife there.”

    … McCall never intended to have a licensed midwife deliver the baby and even bragged upon arriving at the pregnant woman’s house that she had helped deliver another child without anyone’s help.

    “She never took responsibility in this case,” …

    McCall’s attorney, Stephen Demik, argued his client tried to get the pregnant woman to go to the hospital when hemorrhaging occurred during the delivery, but that she refused.

    … The judge does not have the authority to revoke McCall’s medical license. But … revocation was likely after a future review before the state medical board …

    On the face of it, it seems unfair that a student midwife is charged with attending a birth without a licence, and some would argue that she had no other choice. The other options available to her would have been to attend only if she was certain that a licensed / registered midwife was present, and to direct the woman to attend hospital if there was no midwife present. The Board’s purpose is to protect the public, to ensure that only those who are qualified and registered are able to practice and to set the minimum acceptable standards of care so that the public can be assured of a certain standard. In this case, the attending person was not a midwife, but a student midwife. Although it can be argued that the woman would not have expected the student midwife to act to the same standard that a licensed / registered midwife would act, the woman would have expected a level of care that was above that of a lay person. It’s for this reason that universities prohibit student midwives from attending births on their own: there must always be a registered midwife present and assuming overall responsibility (legally and professionally) for the safety of the birth.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Debate to mandate a license for Oregon midwives reignites after baby’s death

    Link

    Randy Everitt, a top state health regulator, calls it “a hornet’s nest.”

    Val Hoyle, a Eugene lawmaker, calls it “a hot mess.”

    The death of a Eugene newborn as well as pressure from the state medical establishment has revived the debate over whether midwives should be allowed to deliver babies without a license. Currently, 27 states allow midwives; only in Oregon and Utah is a license for midwives optional.

    Half of the estimated 150 midwives in Oregon are licensed, an apprenticeship process that requires attending 45 births while under supervision, completing 40 hours of specialized training and passing a variety of exams. About 1,000 home births per year occur in Oregon.

    Pressure to mandate licensing for all midwives has repeatedly collided with the sentiment that birthing is not state business.

    The debate, however, is changing.

    In July after eight days of labor, Margarita Sheikh of Eugene gave birth to a boy who had no heartbeat … She blames the two unlicensed midwives … saying they refused to send her to the hospital when she asked, and didn’t appear to know how to give infant CPR …

    … News of her case has even caused some licensed midwives to publicly call for change.

    For years, Melissa Cheyney … who chairs the state Board of Direct-Entry Midwifery, has not taken a position on mandatory licensing even as she’s studied mortality rates and pushed for better reporting of birth outcomes.

    Now, however, she thinks it’s time to make licensing required. Sheikh’s options to hold her midwives accountable are limited because the state can’t investigate unlicensed midwives, says Cheyney, and “I can’t really accept that anymore.”

    … “As a feminist it’s a really hard choice for me to make, because I don’t think the government should have its laws on my body,” … “But I also think any provider … should be held to a certain clinical standard.”

    Studies have found low-risk home births to be safe: in fact, some have shown fewer complications than hospital births. Studies that include higher-risk pregnancies, however, have found home births to be less safe than ones attended by a medical doctor. Higher-risk births include breech births as well as when a woman has previously had a Caesarean.

    Certified nurse midwives, who typically attend hospital births, are required to be licensed … It’s the direct-entry midwives, who typically attend home births, at the center of the mandatory licensing debate.

    Midwives who oppose mandatory licensing say it could drive some midwives underground, hurt access to training and restricting access to home births.

    Home birthing has a devoted following based on skepticism of the medical establishment.

    Sue Burns … intentionally chose an unlicensed midwife, one without access to drugs, to ensure the birth of her daughter last year was as natural as possible. Though she ended up going to a hospital for a Caesarean after 80 hours of labor, she said she’s glad that option was a distant last resort.

    Burns says mandatory licensing would make home birthing “much less accessible. It potentially could lead down the road to home births becoming illegal, or before that home birth becoming too expensive for people who don’t have insurance to afford it. Midwives keep each other accountable and I just don’t think the state needs to step in at this point.”

    Another factor in the renewed mandatory licensing debate: A flood of investigations has driven up costs and stress for licensed midwives …

    More than 40 complaints were filed against licensed midwives in the last year, compared to an annual average of six or seven in years prior …

    The complaints required the hiring of three new investigators, he adds. To pay for it, the state is boosting annual midwife licensing fees from $630 to $1,800.

    The surge in complaints is partly explained by a 2010 law requiring medical professionals to file complaints if they have concerns over home births transferred to hospitals. But some midwives feel the medical establishment is using the complaint process to eliminate their competition …

    Ironically, the perception that any home birth transferred to a hospital will draw a complaint risks making midwives afraid to seek medical help …

    … In light of the Sheikh case, she thinks mandatory licensing is inevitable. “As a profession, we should be driving this decision, and not the Legislature and not the anti-midwifery proponents.”

    And Stella Dantas, an OHSU doctor who supports mandatory licensing, thinks the cause will be helped by a study expected to be published later this year showing Oregon has a high rate of infant mortality during labor.

    … His Eugene colleague, Hoyle, said she wants to find a compromise, “to ensure that we have a system that allows women to make appropriate choices — and to understand who’s qualified and who’s not qualified.”

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Choosing the right care provider

    Choosing the right practitioner is a very personal decision and there is no right or wrong choice. Some women will make an initial choice of care provider and decide to change care providers during the pregnancy other women will make one choice in their first pregnancy and then a different choice in a subsequent pregnancy. What’s important is understanding all the options available so that you can feel confident to choose the best option for your needs.

    When you are considering a care provider, it’s also necessary to consider where you would like to give birth and to ensure that your care provider can attend you in your chosen setting. You might choose to birth your baby in a public hospital as a public or private patient, in a private hospital as a private patient, in a birth centre or at home. It can be helpful when trying to make a decision to write down a list of questions you may have and also consider what is important to you as you make your choices. For example:

    What do I want from my care?
    What type of practitioner would I feel most comfortable with?
    Do I want public or private care?

    These are questions only you can answer. Other questions are for your care providers, and it’s a good idea to interview a few care providers – midwives and obstetricians – before making a choice. Midwives and obstetricians will charge a fee for interviews and you are able to claim this through Medicare (your midwife will need to be eligible in order for you to claim a Medicare benefit). It is important during the interview that you ask all the questions that are on your mind, and to be aware of how you feel throughout the interview. Your care provider should inspire you with confidence, help you to feel at ease and comfortable, and the appointment should feel unhurried.

    Likewise, your care provider may like to “interview” you, and this is so that your care provider can be sure that s/he can meet your needs. Maternity care is provided in a partnership and so it’s important that both parties feel really comfortable with the other.

    There are many questions you might wish to ask your care provider; the best suggestion is to consider what is important to you and write a list of questions.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Are home births safe?

    Link

    Jon Barrett is accustomed to dealing with anxious mothers-to-be. As chief of maternal-fetal medicine at Toronto’s Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, one of the main concerns he hears from patients involves unnecessary medical interventions during delivery.

    He acknowledges that the rate of Caesarian sections and episiotomies is far too high … But he’s more unnerved by what that phenomenon appears to be triggering: a surge in demand for home births.

    Barrett’s concerns about home births stem from experience. Between 1990 and 1992, he was part of an obstetric “flying squad” in Newcastle, England. His job was to travel, by ambulance, to the bedsides of women whose home births had gone awry …

    Two incidents are particularly vivid. The first occurred in winter. Navigating the ambulance through snowy laneways, Barrett’s team arrived to find two midwives frantically working over an unconscious woman. She was in shock and hemorrhaging badly. “I’ve never seen so much blood in my life.” She survived, but only after a massive blood transfusion in hospital. The second woman developed pre-eclampsia, which caused seizures, and went into cardiac arrest as his ambulance pulled up. His team was able to restart her heart and intubate her before rushing her to hospital. She also survived. He says both conditions were unpredictable and could have occurred anywhere, “But I know they would have come less close to dying if it would have happened in hospital.”

    Unlike some of his colleagues on the squad who witnessed fetal deaths during home births, if Barrett’s memories were reduced to pure data in a typical study, they’d be unremarkable. That’s because most home birth data measures deaths, not complications, and his patients survived. “If you want a retrospective study, there’s no maternal mortality there . . . and so is that safe? No, it’s just bloody lucky.”

    The question of how best to measure home birth safety has long plagued researchers … what is counted — mortality rates for mothers and babies during childbirth — offers little insight on the maternal side because … maternal deaths from childbirth are rare … But stories like Barrett’s suggest the numbers don’t tell the whole story. In his view, the bottom line should be obvious: “Sooner or later you’re going to get a disaster because that’s the nature of obstetrics.” He adds, “It’s very rare that it will happen, but it’s got to happen more in home birth.”

    That assertion is at the heart of a furious debate in the birthing community. Mothers who choose to give birth at home often cite research showing there are fewer medical interventions and no increased risk. But in the past year, a new study has emerged that contradicts this. It shows that home births are associated with significantly higher death rates for babies. If correct, the rights of women to control their own bodies and birth experience would seem to conflict with the best interests of their children.

    When the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AJOG) released the now-controversial “Wax Study” last summer, it created the medical equivalent of the Rift Valley amongst birthing experts … [It] confirmed significant benefits to mothers who gave birth at home, including less hemorrhaging, vaginal tearing and epidural use, and fewer infections and Caesarean sections. Unfortunately, these benefits seemed to occur at the baby’s expense: … the report showed that neonatal deaths (defined as deaths within 28 days of birth) were two to three times higher for home births. Clearly, no woman who chooses home birth believes she’s jeopardizing her baby’s health, but the study suggested such faith in the safety of home birthing is undermined by medical evidence. For those who accepted Wax’s results, the benefits of giving birth at home suddenly appeared trivial compared to the risks.

    In many ways, Wax’s study was groundbreaking … a meta-analysis, combined and re-analyzed existing studies, in order to create a bigger sample and, ideally, a more accurate result. He looked at more than 230 peer-reviewed papers published between 1950 and 2009, and selected a dozen that compared planned home births with planned hospital births by low-risk mothers in industrialized countries (Australia, Sweden, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Canada and the U.S.). The study’s vast scope—it encompassed more than 500,000 deliveries—boosted its credibility. As one doctor put it, “half a million births cuts out a lot of noise.”

    Perhaps, but the momentary silence was followed by an outraged roar from home birth supporters, including some whose research showed very different results. “The Wax study is full of mathematical errors,” says Patti Janssen, a professor at the University of British Columbia’s School of Population and Public Health, and lead author of a 2009 cohort study that showed home births to be as safe as hospital births, for women and babies. “The design was wrong, and the calculations were wrong, and it just has to be thrown out the window.” …

    … Wax initially defended his work, but then began refusing interviews … As a flood of letters poured into the AJOG … the publication convened an independent panel to examine the main complaints. In April, it published a sample of those letters, along with a detailed response from Wax. It also released the panel’s conclusion that the study did not need to be retracted.

    But the debate has continued, and gained force, in the wake of a second study … out of the Netherlands … it concluded that babies born to low-risk women, under a midwife’s care (in hospital or at home) are more than twice as likely to die as those born to high-risk women who give birth under an obstetrician.

    Although these results were specific to Holland, and may indicate problems in the way the Dutch system categorizes women as “low- risk,” the study nevertheless provided fresh ammunition to those who believe babies are best delivered by obstetricians, and added fuel to the home birth debate. More letters began to fly, adding to the stack of seemingly contradictory information through which pregnant women are required to sift in order to make an educated decision.

    Nathalie Waite could be the poster mother for the perfect home birth. Waite’s considerations were largely pragmatic when she decided, two years ago, that her fifth baby should be born at home. She had four children attending three different Toronto schools, no nanny, and wanted her delivery to disrupt life as little as possible. It wasn’t a decision she made lightly. Her husband was nervous, but Waite’s midwife reassured them both. They lived near a hospital. Two attending midwives would be in close contact with Waite’s obstetrician and, at the slightest sign of trouble, an ambulance would be in her driveway. Most importantly, Waite knew her own body. She’d had four hospital births. During the two deliveries in which she’d fought … for a natural birth she’d experienced far less pain …

    Had she known what a home delivery would be like, Waite says none of her children would have been born in hospital. “It was purely beautiful.” … “it just felt so natural. It just felt right.”

    This is why home births are special, says Anne Wilson, president of the Canadian Association of Midwives. “It’s a non-medicalized environment where birth becomes a normal part of your family life.” …

    … there is no debating the fact that home births have lower intervention rates. And everyone, on both sides of the argument, agrees that hospital intervention rates are too high …

    His daughter’s birth, in Kingston, Ont., in 2007, was such “a spectacular experience” he and his wife decided to repeat it at their new home in Guelph this year. Unfortunately, their son was born with fluid in his lungs, which concerned their midwife enough to send them to hospital. Everything they experienced from that point on, Shaw says, reinforced their preconceptions. Their son was given blood tests, a chest X-ray and an IV for a condition Shaw believes would have cleared up on its own after several hours. They had to fight for permission to breastfeed … and, he says, when the pediatrician went home without leaving instructions for release, their son remained in an incubator for an additional 15 hours. “Our rights were completely taken away and doctors more or less said this is what we’re going to do to your baby and there’s nothing you can do about it.”

    … Shaw’s mistrust of the medical system runs deep. “I’ve hung around scientists enough to be skeptical of everything I’m told,” … He and his wife refused vitamin K and erythromycin ointment for their children, two treatments hospitals and midwives administer as standard protocol after birth. (Vitamin K ensures the baby’s blood can clot until it starts making the vitamin itself, and erythromycin is an antibiotic that protects against infections from the birth canal that can cause blindness.) …

    In many ways, Shaw and Waite represent opposite ends of the home birth spectrum. Certainly Shaw’s rejection of many of the fundamental tenets of modern medicine contrasts with Waite’s attempt to adapt its benefits to a home birth. But they share an important piece of common ground: both chose to deliver their babies with the help of a midwife.

    Freebirthers, women who deliver without assistance (and often shun prenatal care), represent the smallest sub-section of home birth mothers, and aren’t included in studies on home birth safety. Among their most famous advocates is Janet Fraser, an Australian woman who made famous the term “birth rape” to describe an emergency episiotomy during the birth of her son. “I don’t care if you don’t like the word or the idea, it’s real so get used to it,” … In 2009, Fraser’s baby daughter died after five days of home labour. She continues to advocate for freebirth.

    Freebirthers make most midwives nervous and they horrify obstetricians. Freebirth is the equivalent of playing “Russian roulette with your child,” says André Lalonde, executive vice-president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC). “You don’t play with a child’s life. Especially not where [health care is] free.” That said, the SOGC does believe that midwife-assisted home births are “a reasonable alternative for low-risk women.”

    Yet, asked if he would consider home birth a reasonable option for his family, Lalonde is unequivocal. “No. Definitely not.” He falls back on experience for explanation. “I’ve participated in over 6,000 deliveries in my career and I know that everything looks very fine and suddenly disaster strikes.”

    That conflict between medical experience and faith in a woman’s body to deliver naturally lies at the heart of the home birth debate. But is the concept of natural childbirth in danger of being romanticized? … There is a documentary, popular amongst home birth advocates, entitled Orgasmic Birth; its website invites viewers to “witness the passion as birth is revealed as an integral part of woman’s sexuality and a neglected human right.” Ami McKay’s award-winning novel The Birth House makes a compelling case for home births to a more mainstream audience. In it, the doctor is portrayed as a condescending, patriarchal figure who knocks out his protesting patients with ether, then yanks out their babies. In contrast, the methods of midwife Dora Rare are equally suspect (think mandrake root and witchcraft) yet portrayed with exquisite humanity …

    That kind of experience need not be exclusive to home birth, insist obstetricians. “We should be working to make the environment of the hospital conducive to the home birth experience, rather than having more deliveries at home,” Sunnybrook’s Barrett says.

    But midwives like Anne Wilson maintain there’s nothing to equal the experience of a home birth. “If I am delivering a baby in the hospital, you’re a guest in my house. If I’m delivering a baby at home, I’m a guest in your house. And there’s quite a lot of psychological difference there.” Wilson hopes the demand for home births will continue to rise in Canada … she believes that all low-risk women, including those who choose to give birth in hospital, should deliver with a midwife.

    That’s the system adopted by the Netherlands — and the Evers study suggests it’s failing dramatically …

    “I don’t think it’s that important to debate whether [homebirth is] safe, safer or not safe. I think it’s very important to debate how we can make home birth safer because women are going to do it anyway.”

    In the United States, one way to improve safety is by improving midwifery. Training and regulations are a patchwork across the country; in some states, midwives aren’t even required to finish high school. In that respect, the U.S. lags many industrialized countries, including Canada. It’s one of the reasons Canadian midwives bristle at comparisons.

    In contrast to the U.S., {Canadian] midwives are university educated, highly regulated, and well-trained in emergency skills …

    Obstetricians and midwives are in broad agreement on the key measures necessary to reduce risk during home birth. They are the steps taken by Waite: ideally, a low-risk woman would deliver with the assistance of two highly trained midwives who are in close contact with an obstetrician at a nearby hospital. When those steps are put in place, Wald­man says, “it can work almost as safely as the hospital situation.”

    Is “almost” good enough when you’re talking about the survival of a newborn baby? Although he describes himself as a long-time supporter of midwives and birthing centres, the ACOG’s Waldman echoes his Canadian counterpart, Lalonde, when he says he wouldn’t want a home birth for his wife or daughter. “The intrapartum loss rate has got to be higher at home, it’s just intuitional for anybody who does this work. How big that number is could be debated.”

    And is being debated. As larger and larger studies are undertaken, Sunnybrook’s Jon Barrett believes the data will start to show consistently higher risks associated with home births …

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Homebirth midwifery

    In 2010, National Registration came in and required that all health practitioners carry professional indemnity insurance. Indemnity insurance had to cover every aspect of practice. Except there would be no insurance for homebirth. Threatened with the extinction of private homebirth services, the government inserted an exemption to the requirement of insurance for a homebirth. We still need insurance for pregnancy and postnatal care, but not the actual birth …. At home.

    What about when we need to transfer women to hospital? It happens in 10% – 50% of cases, depending on how a midwife practices, how adherent she is to the ACM Guidelines, safety issues and so on.

    Typically, we go with our clients to hospital and stay to support them when they are transferred. This has not been questioned until now.

    Does “support” at a homebirth transfer constitute “midwifery practice” for which we need insurance? In considering the support vs practice issue, we should consider the sorts of situations that may arise while we are supporting a woman in hospital, and how we would respond. Please consider the following scenarios:

    1. A woman transfers from home to hospital and has a CTG (baby heart rate monitor) in progress. The private midwife is in the room with the woman and her partner. There is a concerning abnormality in the baby’s heart rate. The midwife rings the bell. Several minutes elapse. The midwife rings the bell again. Should she act (change the woman’s position, cease the Syntocinon infusion if it is in progress, increase fluids etc) or not? Because if the midwife did act she’d be practicing midwifery. Let’s assume the midwife did not act. Fast forward to the birth and there is a bad outcome. Will the midwife be considered to have been partly liable for failing to act? How will the woman see this scenario if the midwife didn’t act and her baby was harmed? Do you think the woman might try to sue her midwife who she has paid to attend her birth as advocate / support / immediate second opinion person and so on?
    2. A woman has had her baby. Hospital staff have left the room and it’s quiet time for the parents. The woman mentions to her private midwife that she feels a sudden warmth and dampness and asks her midwife to check. Should the private midwife check? Should she simply press a buzzer and wait? If she does check, she notices a concerning about of vaginal bleeding. She rings the bell and waits. Should she act to stem the flow of blood by massaging the woman’s uterus to a state of contraction? If the hospital staff come and it’s obvious that they’re run off their feet, should the private midwife assist them perhaps by preparing an IV infusion, locating equipment for them to use, reassuring the woman who is the midwife’s client as well as the hospital’s client? Who’s liable if the private midwife prepares the infusion incorrectly and the hospital staff administer it? You might think the hospital staff are liable; they might argue that the private midwife is.
    3. A woman is labouring and the hospital recommends a particular course of action which the woman does not want to follow. She looks to her private midwife for guidance. What should the private midwife say? Nothing? Because if she ventures to provide any advice, she is practicing midwifery.
    4. The hospital staff make an incorrect assessment, for whatever reason. They intend to act on this incorrect assessment with a management plan that the private midwife knows to be inappropriate for the woman. Should she speak up? If she does, she is practicing; if she does not and there’s a bad outcome, could she be liable?

    So you can understand the dilemma that is faced by a midwife who “supports” her client in hospital, and why insurance is necessary whenever “the individual uses their skills and knowledge as a … midwife”. You can also understand the conflict experienced by all – the hospital, woman and midwife, when a midwife attends the hospital with her private client.

    The homebirth exemption covers the birth at home; it does not extend to a home birth transfer. One insurance product covers labour and birth care, however it only covers the care of private patients. Obstetricians don’t – as yet – provide back-up care for home birth women, and midwives do not have admitting rights to be able to admit women. Hence, women are admitted as public patients when they transfer from a homebirth.

    This has been known for a while now, that insurance does not cover the care of public patients, women who transfer from home to hospital are public, therefore the midwife is not covered. We didn’t think it mattered because we assumed that “support” requires no insurance. Right? Wrong!

    We need to have insurance to practice, but how is practice defined? The Registration Board defines it:

    Practice means any role, whether remunerated or not, in which the individual uses their skills and knowledge as a nurse or midwife. For the purposes of this registration standard, practice is not restricted to the provision of direct clinical care. It also includes working in a direct non-clinical relationship with clients, working in management, administration, education, research, advisory, regulatory or policy development roles, and any other roles that impact on safe, effective delivery

    In effect this means if you are a private midwife, you are a private midwife wherever you are and whomever you’re with. As soon as we use our knowledge or skills, we are considered to be practicing, and we cannot not use knowledge that we have.

    Where does this leave homebirth and midwifery?

    From the woman’s perspective, who would choose a private midwife for home birth care when faced with a possibility of transfer to hospital without the private midwife whose “support” / advice would be most valuable when faced with an unexpected situation?

    From the private midwife’s perspective, who can sleep at night knowing she may have to leave a woman at the hospital gate right when the woman needs her midwife the most?

    The absurd thing about all of this is that midwives can simply unregister and have none of these issues. And they are doing just that! So long as we don’t call ourselves “midwife”, we can do just as we please. You see, we have title protection (“midwife” is a protected title), but not practice protection. Anyone can assist a woman in birth. Unregistered midwives work with no practice and referral guidelines, no regulation, no compulsory hospital booking for homebirth clients, no insurance costs, no continuing professional development costs, no obstetric consultation if it is not desired – you can do what you want, so long as you don’t call yourself a midwife. It’s absolutely legal.

    Is this a safe system of care? Is this meeting the needs of homebirth women and babies? Isn’t it far better to have a system whereby a private midwife can admit her client to hospital if need be, and continue her care in the hospital?

    It seems that no-one can force hospitals to enable admitting rights for midwives, even though this is was the Health Minister’s intention when the reforms were rolled out. We have reached a situation that requires urgent resolution.

    For now, I have taken the decision to cease my homebirth practice. I am no longer accepting homebirth bookings, however I am of course homebirthing with my booked clients who have chosen homebirth.

    This has been a distressing and difficult decision. I love attending homebirths. There’s something special about being home with a woman in labour and welcoming a baby into the world gently and peacefully at home. It’s really special. Relaxed, calm, peaceful, joyous. No hospital noises or smells, no clinical store rooms, no hospital bed and stainless steel, no doors banging, phones / pagers ringing, people yelling down corridors. Just home furnishings, carpet, softness, warmth and love. The perfect way for a baby to journey into this world. My heart is very heavy with this decision. Once I have admitting rights, I will start homebirthing again. However for now, I feel incapable of dropping a woman at the hospital gate and not supporting her through labour; and I am not willing to be seen to be practicing without insurance as this is an offense.

    I am continuing to birth with women in hospital as I am fortunate to be able to do so and we have had amazing feedback from women and their partners. I truly believe it represents the ultimate in private maternity care. No-one is ever “transferred” as we can accommodate all levels of care and care needs and women are supported by continuity of midwifery and obstetric care. This is a far superior model than home birth where any obstetric involvement entails the woman being seen by an unfamiliar obstetrician in a hospital clinic and any labour transfer entails moving to a new location to be cared for by strangers. I strive to give women and babies the very best care and in my heart, I know that our collaborative model of care is the very best in private care. I am, however, very sad to leave behind homebirth for now. It has been my passion and dream for most of my life.

    ‘Illegal’ midwives: Is Australia destined for the same?

    An article from Canada explains their midwifery system which includes unregistered midwives.

    Ann (not her real name) operates outside the regulated profession, living life on the edge, exposed to a constant threat of legal action should births under her watch go wrong.

    She knows five other unregistered midwives working in Montreal’s so-called “parallel network.” They typically help women who are unable to secure legal midwife services to have their babies at home or in a birthing centre, and who reject the official alternative of giving birth in a hospital

    There is no shortage of demand for their services. With just 140 registered midwives able to practise across the entire province, the parallel network fills a yawning gap in the market. Much of the birthing industry – obstetricians, gynecologists and some registered midwives – would consider its covert practitioners to be charlatans. But, to women determined to choose how, where and with whom they give birth, they are valued allies.

    Take Teprine Baldo, who had her eldest child, now 2 years old, at home with the help of what she calls a “midwife recognized by the community. I prefer the term. It’s more respectful. People tend to talk about illegal midwives the way they used to talk about witches,” she says.

    There has been one prosecution over the years. In 2006, Diane Boutin was forced to transfer a woman in her care to … Hospital after complications set in mid-labour. Following an emergency Caesarean, the gynecologist on duty filed a complaint with the provincial order of midwives … which went on to successfully pursue Boutin for illegal practice under Quebec’s professional code, a felony carrying a fine of up to $6,000.

    In the days before the profession began its slow march toward legalization in the 1990s, all midwives were renegades operating outside the system, some entirely self-taught, others holding foreign qualifications unrecognized by the province. But, times have changed and as the now-regulated profession wages a PR battle for public acceptance, pushing against residual resistance from an often skeptical medical establishment, it cannot be seen to condone illegal practice.

    parents are likely to be the biggest losers when things go wrong, should newborns be left damaged as a direct result of negligence or malpractice.

    It’s a hugely sensitive issue. Sinclair Harris, a registered midwife at Pointe Claire birthing centre, is sympathetic with her unregistered counterparts. But, she says, “You need an understanding of pathology, of the things that can go wrong, if you are to be available for the mainstream public.”

    Women like Baldo are incredulous that they are still being denied that choice, outraged that the black market midwives helping the most determined to exercise basic rights over their bodies risk prosecution.

    “It’s like we’re being told we can’t birth properly,” she says. “I’m not against hospitals. My issue is that there’s often no alternative.”

    At 32 weeks, she dropped out of the system, switching to an unregistered midwife

    Seeking closure after a traumatic first birth in hospital, Caroline Gauthier gave birth to her second child at home with an unregistered midwife.

    She was living in British Columbia, pregnant with her first child, when her dream of an intervention-free home birth went awry. Transferred to hospital by her registered midwife after her cervix was slow to dilate, she was administered hormones to speed up labour.

    “I was like Jabba the Hutt, hooked up to the monitor,” she says. Staff forgot to turn on the oxygen supply to her mask, leaving her flailing about for help. When her baby finally arrived after a traumatic final push, she was barely able to touch his foot before he was whisked away.

    Pregnant with her second child in Quebec, she immediately set about trying to secure a midwife at the Du Boisé birthing centre in the Laurentians. However, her place was contingent on her delivering at the birthing centre.

    But Gauthier had already set her heart on giving birth at home. At 32 weeks, she dropped out of the system, switching to an unregistered midwife. Again, her labour was long, but she sat out the hours in the bath and in bed. “This time, I had a midwife who didn’t have a system to please,” she says.

    After three days of labour, the baby’s head popped out while she was on her way to the bath. “In less than two minutes, the whole body was out,” she says. He didn’t immediately cry, “but nobody made a circus out of it.”

    Vindicated by her second experience, she is now a fierce advocate of women’s right to give birth as they choose. “I was given the time my baby needed,” she says. “My neighbours tell me I was so brave delivering at home. My reaction is: ‘My God, you’re brave giving birth in hospital. You’re putting yourself at their mercy. You don’t know what you’re getting yourself into.’ ”

    The midwife: With no insurance, every new client is a gamble

    On D-day, Ann arrives on the scene with a case containing oxygen supplies, a heart monitor, synthetic oxytocin, herbal remedies, suture material and local anesthetic for stitches.

    She has been practising midwifery in the parallel network for more than 10 years. Clients find their way to her by word of mouth. She has a busy schedule year round, attending to three or four clients a month.

    Clients are generally women who have been unable to find a registered midwife …

    Occasionally she has transferred cases to hospital …

    With no insurance, every new client is a gamble. “My insurance is the trust I develop with the parents. I trust people who have the deep belief that it’s best for the birth of the baby. Nobody can be sure of the end result.”

    There is a contract, though she is clearly ill at ease with cold legal realities. “It’s about ensuring the parents understand what they’re getting into,” she says. “But, sometimes I forget to get people to sign. We’re on another level. It’s not about business.”

    She describes herself as a self-taught midwife eschewing a system where midwives are “too stressed, too watched.” …

    The four-year university program didn’t appeal to her. “I thought it was too focused on pathology. There was no alternative medicine. No spirituality,” she says. “It’s as if only one kind of intelligence is allowed. Forget emotional intelligence.”

    Midwifery was legalized in Quebec in 1999, following a five-year pilot project. Home births with the assistance of registered midwives have only been allowed since 2005.

    In a 2007 Statistics Canada report, 71 per cent of women who had delivered with a registered midwife rated the experience as “very positive,” compared with 53 per cent of women who had delivered in a hospital.

    According to research … midwife-assisted home births are associated with lower rates of obstetric interventions and adverse outcomes. Newborns born at home were also less likely to require resuscitation or oxygen therapy.

    Australia is heading for a similar situation, brought about by a few factors: the recent position statement on homebirth which effectively prevents midwives from attending high risk births at home, the lack of visiting rights to enable most midwives to birth in hospital with their clients, dissatisfaction with current hospital-based maternity services that are seen by women to be impersonal and highly interventionist, and a differing view of things such as risk and responsibility. Although some midwives are making the choice to unregister and continue to attend births, they do face the same issues that are explained in the article.

    Visit my website to explore homebirth and hospital birth.

    Well-off mothers spend thousands on private midwives

    An article
    from the UK explains that women are spending thousands of pounds on private midwives to achieve the ‘perfect’ birth. The situation is not too different to the Australian experience.

    In the UK, private midwives charge between £1,800 and £5,000 for a birth, but their services are in high demand from professional, well-educated women who have become disenchanted with the hospital experience. The number of mothers paying for private midwives to attend home births has tripled in the last eight years.

    Demand has become so high in parts of London and the South East that some expectant mothers have been unable to find a private midwife to assist them.

    Many of the expectant mothers are older and have been put off by previous experiences in NHS maternity wards.

    Women who engage private midwives claim they can form a relationship with one person rather than seeing a succession of strangers.

    Midwives understand that women want continuity of care and someone to talk to them and answer their questions. Women don’t want routine and unnecessary interventions in their pregnancy and birth, and they want more extensive postnatal care.

    The Australian experience is the same as that in the UK. Women seek private midwifery care for home birth or hospital birth so that they can form a relationship with one person who will be with them from their first antenatal appointment, through to birth and 6 weeks after their baby is born.

    In Australia, eligible midwives can provide medicare-funded care which makes private midwifery care more affordable to women, thanks to the maternity reforms.

    Visit my website to explore homebirth and hospital birth.

    Dutch abandon home birth

    A recent article informs us that:

    RISK OF DEATH INDUCES DUTCH WOMEN TO ABANDON HOME BIRTHS

    It goes on to say that in the last 10 years, the percentage of Dutch women who are giving birth in hospitals has risen from 37% to 75%. They state that reasons for this include:

  • concern at the disproportionally high baby death rate in home birth
  • the rising popularity of epidurals, a pain relief option in labour which is only available in hospitals.
  • The Dutch system of home births has been promoted as one which other countries should emulate, including New Zealand. However, last year a large study found that the perinatal death rate was greater in low risk women who were cared for by midwives than in higher risk women who were cared for by obstetricians. The researchers concluded that the Dutch system of risk selection is not as effective as was once thought.

    I have read the study that has been referred to above. The study concludes that:

    The main finding of this study is that the Dutch obstetric system that is based on risk selection and obstetric care at two levels may not be as effective as was once thought. The Dutch obstetric system itself possibly contributes to the high perinatal mortality compared with most European countries. We found that delivery-related perinatal death was significantly higher among low risk pregnancies in midwife supervised primary care than among high risk pregnancies in obstetrician supervised secondary care.

    The Dutch system relies on a risk assessment. Women are either in primary care or secondary care. Women who are in primary care have midwifery care and they have the option of home birth or hospital birth. The Netherlands currently has a 22% homebirth rate. Women with risk-associated pregnancies have obstetric (secondary) care and give birth in hospital. They might have issues such as high blood pressure, diabetes, twins, a previous caesarean and so on. Overall, 49.5% women remain in primary care at the start oaf labour, and 35% women remain in primary care throughout labour and birth. 65% women either start their pregnancy in secondary care or are transferred to secondary care at some stage in their pregnancy or labour. It is a system that has worked well for many years.

    However, the study has found that the intrapartum (labour and birth) death rate among term babies without congenital malformations (birth defects) was as follows:

  • For babies who started labour in primary (midwifery) care: 0.96/1000
  • For babies who started labour in secondary (obstetric) care: 0.24/1000
  • For births that took place in primary care: 0.91/1000
  • For births that took place in secondary care: 0.45/1000
  • For births that were referred from primary care to secondary care in labour: 1.09/1000
  • Babies of women who were referred from a midwife to an obstetrician during labour had a 3.66 times higher risk of delivery-related perinatal death than did infants of women who started labour supervised by an obstetrician.

    The study concludes that:

    The obstetric care system in the Netherlands may contribute to the high perinatal mortality

    and:

    the Dutch system of risk selection in relation to perinatal death at term is not as effective as was once thought.

    I suggest that there is another major issue involved that has been ignored in the above suggestion. In the Netherlands, midwives book 105 women per year. You read that correctly. While in Australia, midwives care for around 20-40 women per year, in the Netherlands it’s a huge caseload of 105 women per year. Therefore it is impossible for the midwife to personally attend every labour for the duration. Instead, there is a system in place where the women are cared for by a Kraamverzorgenden who stays with the woman during labour and for the first week after the baby is born. This person does not perform any midwifery care but provides support to the woman. The midwife pops in and out every two or four hours to examine the woman and perhaps listen to the baby’s heart beat – I say “perhaps” because there is no official guideline in The Netherlands that this ought to be attended at any specified interval. Hence the midwives check the baby’s heart beat as and when they choose. Acknowledging that the midwife does not sit with each women in labour, it’s plausible that the baby’s heart beat would only be checked every two or four hours. The standard of care for the UK and Australia is that the baby’s heart beat should be checked every 15 minutes in labour and after every contraction in the second stage of labour when the baby is being born. This is identified in the article:

    Of major concern is the fact that the highest mortality was among the infants of women who were referred from primary care to secondary care during labour because of an apparent complication. Hypothetically, this high mortality could have several causes … diagnosis in primary care can be delayed because the midwife is not always present during the first stage of labour and fetal heart beats are often checked only every two to four hours.

    I am interested in why this fundamental issue has not been addressed; rather, a complete review of a system that is in place in other countries – successfully – has been called for?

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Homebirth Position Statement

    The Australian College of Midwives (ACM) is Australia’s professional body for midwives. Recently, ACM was charged with the task of preparing a position statement on home birth. This position statement will have a great impact on the future of home birth services in Australia, so it is of enormous significance to home birthing women and their midwives. As well as a position statement, ACM has developed a Guidance which clarifies the expectations for private midwives when providing midwifery care for a planned homebirth.

    The documents are:
    Literature Review
    Homebirth position statement
    Guidance for private midwives attending homebirths

    Probably the best way to read these documents is to start with the literature review because it provides the context for the guidance and position statement.

    ACM’s literature review was restricted to studies which met all of the following criteria:

  • Studies of planned homebirths with a registered provider/s, compared with planned hospital birth
  • Research articles that also addressed maternal and neonatal outcomes
  • Articles from developed countries, written in English and with a publication date between 1995 and 2011.
  • Any articles that did not describe studies which included a comparison group, investigate planned homebirths or relate to maternal and/or neonatal outcomes were excluded. This rigorous process identified eleven studies which formed the basis of the literature review. The review covered 352,655 homebirths from Australia and around the world.

    In general terms, the studies say that for a low-risk, healthy woman and baby, midwife-attended home birth does not increase the chance of the baby dying or being harmed. Home birth does, however, increase the chance that the woman will have a drug-free, intervention-free birth: that her labour will most likely start on its own, progress normally and lead to a normal birth with little likelihood of needing any stitches. Also, she is far more likely to breastfeed and to experience her birth as very positive and satisfying. This is important because it is well-known that interventions carry risks and that there can be a cascade effect, so that when you begin with one intervention, you often end up doing more interventions as the labour progresses (eg induction leading to long labour, leading to epidural, leading to forceps delivery). This is all minimised in the group of women and babies who birth at home with a qualified midwife who has a link in to the hospital with ready access to obstetric and paediatric care if needed.

    However, a small number of studies demonstrated that home birth increases the rate of perinatal mortality. The research suggests that the inclusion of high risk factors in home birth, increases the chance of a baby dying or being seriously harmed during birth (most commonly through low levels of oxygen). Other issues may relate to the time and distance to travel from home to hospital during labour if transfer is needed, as well as the woman’s acceptance or refusal of recommended interventions once she has transferred. It is important to note that the outcomes of women and their babies who transfer to hospital during labour will generally compare unfavourably with those not transferred due to the change in risk status of the women.

    The ACM concludes that, “It seems evident from the literature that planned home birth is a safe option for women who are at low risk of complications and who receive care from qualified attendants with adequate access to support, advice, referral and transfer mechanisms.”

    With that conclusion in mind, the ACM has developed a position statement on home birth, and following on from that, guidance for private midwives who attend home births. Much discussion has been had about these documents on various forums and email lists. Some excerpts from the position statement and guidance follow:

    It is the position of the Australian College of Midwives that home is an appropriate place of birth for women considered to be at low obstetric risk, and that women must be supported in safe, planned homebirth, by midwives and/or other appropriately qualified and regulated health professionals with adequate access to support, advice, and referral and transfer mechanisms.

    Some women may choose a planned homebirth even when this is not recommended by her care providers. In such circumstances, a midwife should, after discussions with each woman and in consultation with other health professionals, work with the woman looking for options and resolutions within midwifery professional standards to address the woman’s needs.

    Following documented discussions and appropriate consultation and referral as may be indicated, a midwife has the right to decline to continue to provide, or to accept, midwifery care if it is felt that this would require the midwife to practise outside of the midwife’s scope, skills and competencies.

    Midwives have a duty of care to each woman they provide care to, and this means that in labour, or urgent situations, a midwife must attend the woman.

    In the absence of a consistent definition of ‘low obstetric risk’, low obstetric risk is considered to be a pregnancy, labour and birth that are anticipated to be problem free.

    There are some contraindications to a planned homebirth which women should be informed of at booking. These are;
    • Multiple pregnancy
    • Abnormal presentation (including breech presentation)
    • Preterm labour prior to 37 completed weeks of pregnancy
    • Post term pregnancy of more than 42 completed weeks
    • Scarred uterus

    Issues identified as “B” or “C” in the Australian College of Midwives National Midwifery Guidelines for Consultation and Referral (“the Guidelines”) would require consultation with an Obstetrician prior to proceeding with a planned homebirth. Consultation is mandatory for the midwife providing care.

    Women must be made aware of the midwife’s obligation to consult at – or prior to – booking-in.

    Ideally, midwives should meet the criteria for gaining notation as an Eligible Midwife.

    Midwives must ensure that they have documented processes in place for consultation and referral

    Any decision to provide care for a planned homebirth should take into account the possibility of transfer to a hospital and the time needed for transfer to that hospital in the event that this is deemed necessary. Women should be counselled on the possibility of transfer, and midwives should ensure that the supporting hospital is provided with a care plan/documentation around the woman’s intention for a planned homebirth.

    Midwives must utilise documented evidence-based guidelines to support antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal midwifery care.

    Midwives should undergo a formal professional peer review process at least once every three years.

    At – or prior to – booking, the midwife must advise the woman of situations where homebirth cannot be supported. At any time, the midwife is not obliged to participate in a homebirth that the midwife considers will increase the risk of harm to the woman or her baby.

    Women must be respected in the choices that they make, and that includes choices to refuse a recommended course of action at any stage of her pregnancy,

    An information pack should be made available to women that should include a ‘Terms of Care’ document outlining the terms under which midwifery care will be provided.
    Information should also include the potential for transfer to hospital for unforseen complications.
    The following information must be provided to women at the onset of their care, ideally in writing, followed up in discussion and signed by the woman:
    • Midwifery scope of practice, including the Australian College of Midwives Guidelines for Consultation and Referral;
    • Philosophy of care;
    • Choice of birth setting, including requirements for homebirth;
    • Contact information for the midwife;
    • Back-up arrangements;
    • Standards of practice and protocols, including consultation and referral
    • Responsibilities of the woman;
    • Confidentiality and access to the woman’s records (privacy agreement); and
    • Financial arrangements

    It’s fair to say that ACM’s position statement and guidance are not ideologically- or belief-driven. It’s clear that the documents are driven by evidence. ACM has tackled the conflicting issue of the woman’s negative right to autonomy versus the midwife’s responsibility to practice safely and within accepted standards of care. While much is being said on various forums, email lists and face-to-face about these documents, somehow, I can’t help but wonder if the issue is really about the restriction of home birth to low-risk women, or the fact that at this point in time, a woman and private midwife have no option but to birth at home.

    In the whole of Australia, there is currently no clinical privileging except in one small hospital. A high risk woman’s only option via this new position statement is to birth in hospital, however her private midwife would not be able to attend in the full capacity of midwife – or even as a support midwife: it has recently come to our attention that the midwife cannot legally attend in hospital at all.

    I’ll explain why: the MIGA insurance policy covers privately-admitted patients. If the woman is admitted as a public patient after being transferred from a home birth (either in pregnancy or during labour), MIGA insurance does not provide indemnity cover to the midwife in respect of the birth. Most women planning a home birth will have a back-up hospital booking as a public patient. Hence, when the midwife goes in with the woman, the midwife’s insurance does not cover her. It is against the requirements of registration to work without insurance, except at a home birth. In other words, the midwife would be attending the woman in hospital against the requirements of registration.

    In time (hopefully sooner rather than later), midwives will have admitting rights where we can admit, care for and discharge our own private patients, all funded by Medicare and indemnified by MIGA but in the meantime, this is not possible.

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Expectant mothers need facts, not fear

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Here we go again. A debate about home vs hospital birth.

    There is only one thing … that’s more emotive than where you give birth to a baby, and that is how you feed it.

    This week, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists … proposed that more women give birth away from doctors and hospitals. I really want to see how this works, because if there’s anyone more scared of home births than the parents, it’s doctors and midwives. (Note: not all, I know.)

    I’m not a doctor, nor a midwife. I have slightly more experience of pregnancy and birth than some, by virtue of being co-founder of a parenting website for the past seven years and working as a lay rep in a large maternity hospital for four. But really, my opinion, just like so many birthing women, counts for little.

    Look at what this report says: “The model we are proposing focuses on the needs of the woman and her baby by providing the right care, at the right time, in the right place, provided by the right person and which enhances the woman’s experience.” Sound great, doesn’t it? But who will decide what the right care, at the right time, etc, is? Who listens to what a mother … wants?

    Hospitals are so tied by NHS policy and guidelines, and are so scared of being sued that midwives who once were perfectly capable of delivering breech babies, big babies or twins at home (yes, it can be done) no longer can, or do. So it’s easier to book everyone into the hospital. What will change? How will it change? There aren’t enough midwives as it is.

    When I decided to try for a home birth I had to take myself out of the NHS system (an option that may no longer exist soon because of the threat to our independent midwives, but that is another story, for another time) because the idea so terrified almost everyone I met. I was simply deemed too high-risk. But this wasn’t based on any analysis of my actual, individual risks. It was because I ticked two boxes: “over 40″ (this is still being cited as a reason not to have a home birth) and “previous C-section” (ditto). One of the paediatricians at the hospital where I was a lay rep told me I was being irresponsible, that my scar would tear (the risk of uterine rupture is, in fact, very small) and that I’d kill myself and my baby.

    “Don’t expect us to attend to you” were her actual words. Amazingly, because I wasn’t on a dual suicide/infanticide mission, and I didn’t want to leave my firstborn motherless, I asked two separate, senior midwives to go through my previous notes with a fine-tooth comb. Conclusion: no reason at all not to try for a home birth if you want to …

    For many … the thought of giving birth at home is terrifying. I toyed with the idea of a home birth with my first for about 10 minutes. It was only when I saw firsthand what hospitals could offer and after five years of researching birth that I was brave enough even to think about it for my second baby.

    I’ll cut to the chase. I had my home birth without drugs or incident. Yes, it was fantastic. No, you shouldn’t have to have a home birth if you don’t want to, no more than I should have had to go to hospital if I didn’t want to. This brings me on to something that no report can ever address, and that’s the baggage we all – health professionals included – bring into maternity services: our own experiences. They should inform, but not dictate.

    There is one bit of the report that I think is underplayed: … “Women themselves need the support and encouragement of society, including the professionals, to take responsibility for their own health”. Indeed, we all need to take responsibility for how babies are born. Women need to stop dramatising labour, especially to their daughters. (Maternal influence is huge on a daughter’s subsequent expectation of her own labour.) Health professionals need to stop lecturing a woman on how to give birth and start listening to what women want – and then provide consistent, accurate, non-emotive information to help her set the agenda.

    We all need to stop projecting our own experiences and think that’s how it will/should be for everyone else. Only then can we hope to reverse this collective hysteria that surrounds giving birth. People who make TV programmes and films: I have a special message for you, because how you portray birth is so hugely influential. I know it makes for better TV to have a woman on her back, in a hospital, screaming and tearing off her husband’s earlobes, but please, counterbalance this with women also giving birth quietly, in a position other than prone and sometimes at home. It’s partly because of you that it took me nearly 40 years to realise that it could be done.

    We need a cultural shift on homebirth

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    … As a woman who chose homebirth, I wholeheartedly agree with … statements that “too many babies are born in the traditional ‘hospital’ setting” and that “women deserve a medical service which focuses around their needs, is safe and effective … and one in which the woman’s informed choice is respected”.

    … science demonstrates the positives of midwife-led care for low-risk pregnancies. A recent Cochrane review concluded that “midwife-led care confers benefits for pregnant women and their babies and is recommended” while finding numerous benefits and no adverse effects.

    In stark contrast to the above the words that crop up most frequently in the comments sections of major paper’s websites today are “risk”, “danger” and “pain”. When there is a perception that childbirth is inherently dangerous and agonisingly painful, it is logical that this proposal is being seen by many as a terrifying way of saving money at women’s expense.

    According to RCOG, under 10% of births happen outside hospital. For the other 90% to be confident that the offer of non hospital-based care is a positive step forwards, perhaps we need to look more closely at this concept of “informed choice”.

    … Without more information and support we simply can’t expect people who have so recently and vigorously been persuaded out of the home and in to hospital to give birth to forget the often-erroneous arguments of safety, cleanliness and pain relief that were used in the last century to make that shift possible.

    How can women who have had no education in the physiological process of birth at school be expected to know that simply with the right setting and support team they have statistically less chance of needing pain relief, a caesarean or an instrumental delivery and are more likely to feel happy with their experience? Until they know this it will be hard for them to accept the standardisation of maternity care away from hospital.

    That 2011 sees UK obstetricians speaking about the importance of women’s experiences and advocating a holistic approach to care is a positive thing. However, much work is needed before the RCOG maternity recommendations will be seen as broadening choice and improving safety and comfort, rather than forcing women into cheaper but less experienced and equipped care.

    Perhaps the next step is to look at how we can nurture our anxious society so that it has the information at hand, the education as standard and the support as needed to make positive decisions based on knowledge rather than fear.

    The above article is written in response to a report by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) which called for the UK’s National Health Service to provide more midwife-led units and homebirth services for women. The report argued that healthy women at low risk of complications during birth can have a baby in a midwife-led unit without a doctor going anywhere near them.

    Home birth has pros and cons

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Link

    The number of at-home births is small but growing as pregnant women weigh the idea of a drug-free and surgery-free birth in a familiar setting versus the risk of harm to the baby in case of complications.

    When most pregnant women go into labor, they pack their bags for the hospital. When Lara Carlos felt the contractions in November 2008, she set up a birthing tub in her bedroom.

    For the next several hours, Carlos alternated between padding around her home and squatting and pushing in the tub. Her midwife poured water down her back and dabbed her forehead with cold towels. When the baby (they chose the name Vincent) arrived at 1:21 a.m., he spent his first few hours cuddling with his parents in their bed.

    Carlos … is one of a small but growing number of women who are choosing to deliver their babies at home. Her first son, Ivan, had been delivered in a hospital, and she says she found labor at home a dramatic improvement.

    “In the hospital, there were seven medical students in the room when I was pushing my son out,” she said. “At home, it was a very quiet, slow experience, and the water helped me to relax.”

    Though home births account for only about 1% of all births each year … they increased by 20% from 2004 to 2008 … The practice is most popular among well-educated mothers who favor natural childbirth without the drugs or surgeries a hospital might use.

    … The increase has reenergized the fierce debate over the safety of at-home delivery. The practice is officially frowned on by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists … because the absence of emergency medical equipment and specialists accustomed to dealing with complications means that problems during labor could cost the baby’s life.

    “All the existing scientific evidence, as well as state and national statistics, make it ultra-clear that home birth increases the risk of death,” …

    The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists does acknowledge that home births are associated with fewer medical interventions than hospital births … 61% of women who had vaginal delivery received an epidural in 2008, the year the report studied. And a 2006 national survey of women’s childbearing experiences showed that 55% were given Pitocin to speed labor.

    “There’s no doubt that once you end up in a hospital, you end up with more interventions — that’s what drives some families away,” … home birth is reasonable as long as women have few risk factors …, have an emergency backup plan and understand the risks involved.

    Women also turn to home birth in order to avoid caesarean sections, which have become more common as obstetricians became increasingly reluctant to take chances at the slightest sign of fetal distress …

    What’s more, many hospitals do not allow women who have previously had a caesarean to attempt a vaginal birth because of the risk of uterine rupture, even though a 2010 National Institutes of Health advisory panel concluded that the risk of uterine rupture during a vaginal birth after one caesarean was just 1% and that more women should be offered the choice. Women wishing to have a VBAC (vaginal birth after caesarean) may have no option but to do so on their own turf.

    Sarah … had two caesareans but chose a home birth for her third pregnancy, successfully delivering a baby girl in January 2010.

    “We had visited numerous hospitals, and the first time I mentioned a VBAC, I was just shut down completely,” Bolson says. Doctors refused to consider it because of the chance of rupture, she recalls, and one said he couldn’t risk having his medical malpractice insurance skyrocket.

    She eventually found a certified professional midwife who was willing to help her deliver at home, with a backup plan of transfer to a nearby hospital. Though initially worried about complications, “after I was able to release the fear, I was free to birth without any inhibition.”

    Many home-birth moms also say they object to other aspects of hospital births, such as having to lie in a bed, abstain from food during labor and be monitored by an army of nurses.

    “I believe in the intuitive power of the human body,” said Mayim Bialik, an actress and natural-birth advocate who has given birth at home. “I believe in having as much privacy as possible, in being able to move freely, to eat when I want, drink when I want, and to be surrounded by the sounds and smells of what is familiar to me.”

    “Other mammals go off on their own to labor,” adds Dr. Stuart Fischbein, a Los Angeles-based obstetrician who has been delivering exclusively in homes since 2010. “When a patient goes to a hospital, she gets told to lay flat on her back strapped down with monitors with constant interruptions from hospital personnel — does that sound conducive to having a normal labor?”

    Arrangements for a home birth go something like this: Early in the pregnancy a woman finds either a … midwife … The midwife provides some or all of the woman’s prenatal care and is on call as the woman approaches her due date …

    During labor, many women use water tubs because they find the water soothing and pain-relieving; others choose to just move about their homes as they see fit. The midwife monitors the fetus’ heart tones with a Doppler device, and most also bring equipment such as oxygen tanks, anti-hemmorhagic medication, local anesthetic and suturing supplies in case of tearing or bleeding. If an emergency arises that the midwife can’t manage, home-birth moms are advised to transfer immediately to a hospital.

    The core of the home-birth debate lies with the safety of the baby — and here, opinions and the data are sharply divided. A 2005 study of 5,418 births in the U.S. and Canada during 2000 … found that the neonatal death rates of at-home births were comparable to those of births in hospitals.

    But a July 2010 analysis published in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology examined the outcomes of 12 home-and-hospital-birth studies and found that babies born at home die at two to three times the rate of those born in hospitals …

    … the distance to the nearest emergency room can sometimes mean the difference between life and death. “Saying, ‘trust birth’ is like saying ‘trust the weather,’” she says, referring to a slogan occasionally used in natural-birth groups.

    Just as vocal online communities have sprung up to promote home birth, so too have others populated by women whose home-birth attempts turned into tragedies … Liz Paparella’s fourth child was stillborn on her living room couch because her midwife failed to take Paparella to the hospital when she began bleeding during labor.

    “I never thought it was more dangerous to have a baby at home than at the hospital,” says Paparella, who had given birth successfully at home two times previously. “In birth, the risk can change from low to high in a matter of minutes.”

    … A clear answer to the safety question is hard to find because nearly every home-birth study has some flaw that is flagged by one side of the debate or the other as invalidating the results. Given this uncertainty, Ouzounian cautions women to research, prepare and choose wisely.

    Home births, he says, should be considered only by those who have a well-trained midwife and are experiencing no complications with their pregnancy …

    “Under the right circumstances, with the right patient selection and with a … midwife attending, the overall maternal complication rates with home births are comparable” to those of a hospital birth …

    But he also advises women not to think about birth in black-or-white terms: There are many ways to make delivery more “natural” even if it takes place in the hospital …

    Fischbein says that doctors could be more accommodating to their patients by providing them with information about all of their birth options — at home and in the hospital — and stand ready to serve as backups for those who wish to labor at home with a midwife.

    “There’s room in this world for low-risk home birthing and for hospital birthing,” he says. “We really should support each individual woman’s right to choose how to deliver her baby.”

    Rules on patient safety hit midwives

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Homebirth supporters claim bureaucrats are restricting women’s choice by stopping some midwives from managing higher-risk homebirths, particularly women who have had a caesarean delivery.

    Homebirth Australia said it was aware of more than 20 recent cases … where midwives had been deregistered or had conditions imposed on their registration because of claims they were working outside safe guidelines.

    … The Weekend West is aware of a WA midwife who was ordered last week to stop providing care for planned homebirths in women at higher risk, including those who had a caesarean and wanted to have a normal birth in the next pregnancy.

    The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency wrote to the midwife, saying the condition was imposed by the WA Nursing and Midwifery Board because the midwife had not proved he or she could provide a safe homebirth environment for a planned vaginal birth after a caesarean.

    “The board formed the reasonable belief that because of your alleged conduct issues, you pose a serious risk to persons, and it is necessary to take immediate action to impose conditions on your registration to protect public health or safety,” the letter said.

    … the move could force women to have unattended homebirths, putting them and their babies at risk. “We can’t by stealth deregister or pose conditions on midwives which rob women of access to a registered health professional,” she said.

    Australian Medical Association WA president Dave Mountain … questioned whether the health system should allow higher-risk women to exercise the choice of homebirth when there were clear risks for them and their babies.

    What a huge ethical debate – largely unresolved. All women have the right to autonomy – the right to make choices, have control over what happens to their body, to accept or reject advice and interventions, to decide when, where and by whom they will be cared for, to access care – or not. It is a fundamental human right that is enshrined in law.

    On the other side – the health practitioner has a duty of care to the woman and her unborn baby and is obliged to provide safe care at all times. Safety is defined in terms of what the average midwife would do, or by accepted professional standards, or by laws relating to practice. A health practitioner cannot be incited to practice unsafely: they must make a judgment and adhere to professional standards.

    So where does this leave us all when the two positions collide? Although we have guidelines on what we ought to do in those situations, as we can see from the above article, they do not hold water. The consequence for now is an increase in the number of women opting to freebirth – that is an unassisted homebirth (no midwife present). I am hopeful that in time, the regulatory authorities will support midwives to support all women.

    Why Are Home Births Suddenly So Popular?

    Visit my website to learn more about my services.

    Link

    Despite skepticism from the medical establishment, more and more women are opting for home births. Although home births declined from 1990 to 2004, over the subsequent four years, the rate of home births rose by an astounding 20 percent. The increase is due to what experts identify as a natural birth subculture among white women who want more control over the birth experience …

    [Home births are] … safer for low-risk births than going to a hospital. Women who want a more individualized experience with fewer medical interventions are increasingly opting for birth at home, under a midwife’s care. These women are, for the most part, affluent and well-educated, and informed about the potential benefits of home birth. This signals a changing perception of what, before, seemed like an unsafe, illogical decision.

    … home birth, once so controversial, could start to be seen as mainstream.

    Women have home births for a wide variety of reasons. Some react to bad hospital experiences and opt for home births with later children; others respond to cost; others want, in the words of one woman with MS who chose home birth, to “surround myself with people who would support me as a birthing mother, rather than view me as a…patient who would be a liability in need of interventions at every turn.”

    … as home birth becomes more accepted, the more options women have … women deserve the ability to make the choice about what kind of birth they want, and having more options on the table can only be a good thing.