... Katy Hayes ... wanted her third child to be born at home ...
Ten weeks ago, Katy gave birth to a new daughter, Arielle. Soon thereafter, friends say, she started feeling pain but delayed going to the emergency room for four days. In the end, all four of katy's limbs had to be amputated because of a Streptococcal A infection. She's currently fighting for her life in a special unit at a Dallas hospital.
... it begs the question: What are the risks versus the benefits when it comes to home births?
... "Infection in home birth is very, very rare," ... "That's utterly nonsense," says Dr. Joseph Salinas ... "I'm opposed to home birth," ... "There's too many variables to risk the mother's and baby's life in home birth."
Two health care professionals. Two very different perspectives. And one family struggling to redefine itself.
When we compare the infection rates for home and hospital birth, hospital birth is by far the unsafest option. Infection at homebirth is very rare. None-the-less, the doctors and the press are determined to use this case as proof that homebirth is unsafe for yet another reason.
The final statement begs readers to agree with the doctor's comments, depite there being no logic behind his statement. Midwife-attended homebirth for low-risk women is at least as safe as hospital birth and this has been proved by numerous International studies. The article does not say why the woman did not seek help sooner, but this is probably the key, rather than the fact that she gave birth at home.