A study reported in the BMJ found that women whose pregnancies were low - risk suffered far fewer severe negative outcomes from
home than hospital births, especially after the first pregnancy.
Because women in Gelderland more often choose
home than hospital birth, only women choosing hospital birth were recruited in the final four months of the study.
Not exact matches
As I continue on this journey, I find the more I learn about
hospitals and standard procedures and doctors» timeframes, etc., the more I think women who elect to
birth in a
hospital are «brave» rather
than the women who do so in their own
homes.
Pretending that only midwife attended
home births are acceptable isn't any better
than pretending that only OB attended
hospital births are acceptable.
I attended a
home birth and it was so much nicer
than any
hospital birth I have ever seen or heard about.
I live in a state where I can not have a
home birth unless it is unattended and I live more
than an hour away from a
hospital and 1 / 2hour from a town.
Although I'm sure it's possible, I think that for the most part, these «orgasmic
births» are much more likely to occur in a birthing center or
home environment
than in the
hospital.
A woman who had a still
birth with a midwife present summed it up beautifully —
home birth and UC babies must be more cherished
than hospital birthed babies.
For a lot of people,
home is a much less stressful environment
than a doctor's office or a
hospital, which can make a big difference during
birth.
For now, there is not conclusive data that proves
home births are any more dangerous
than hospital births and carry the 2 - 3 fold neonatal mortality risk.
Birth centers provide an in - between choice for parents who would like to deliver outside of a
hospital setting but with more help
than they would be able to get at
home.
And most of all, because there are NO guarantees, one way or the other - the numbers on safety and well being with
home births are better
than those in the
hospital.
Low risk
birth in the Netherlands at
home with a midwife is more likely to result in a DEAD baby
than high risk
birth in a
hospital with a doctor.
The «research» done to try and prove to people that
home birth would be more dangerous
than hospital birth is usually in favor of
hospitals... Why?
Home births have a lower risk profile than hospital birth, meaning that mostly low - risk women CHOOSE home bi
Home births have a lower risk profile
than hospital birth, meaning that mostly low - risk women CHOOSE
home bi
home birth.
«While most pregnant women who choose to have planned
home births are at lower risk of complications due to careful screening, planned
home births are associated with double to triple the risk of infant death
than are planned
hospital births.
A more recent study showed that low risk
birth (
home or
hospital) with a Dutch midwife has a HIGHER perinatal mortality rate
than high risk delivery with a Dutch obstetrician.
«
Home births have a lower risk profile
than hospital births, with fewer
births to teenagers or unmarried women, and with fewer preterm, low birthweight, and multiple
births» (source: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db84.htm
Here is a BBC article that finds
home birth less risky
than a planned
hospital birth.
Low risk women in primary care at the onset of labour with planned
home birth had lower rates of severe acute maternal morbidity, postpartum haemorrhage, and manual removal of placenta
than those with planned
hospital birth.
Home Birth on the Rise by a Dramatic 20 Percent One mother chose home birth because it was cheaper than going to a hospi
Home Birth on the Rise by a Dramatic 20 Percent One mother chose home birth because it was cheaper than going to a hosp
Birth on the Rise by a Dramatic 20 Percent One mother chose
home birth because it was cheaper than going to a hospi
home birth because it was cheaper than going to a hosp
birth because it was cheaper
than going to a
hospital.
This new set of NICE guidelines concluded that healthy women with straightforward pregnancies are safer to give
birth at
home, or in a midwife - led
birth centre,
than at a
hospital with the care of an obstetrician.
My son was born 7 lbs 1oz, he lost more
than 10 % of his
birth weight and they still released him from the
hospital, I gave him a bath the next day by this point 4 days old, he didn't wake up, took him right to another
hospital where the admitted him and put him on an IV and under the lights, they had me pumping every hour producing a max of 5 ml a time, finally they discovered I had insufficient milk glands, I was not allowed to have a bottle until I got
home.
Studies there (sorry, don't have any references on hand, I'll try to get them posted later) show that
home - birthing in this setting is just as safe for mother and child for a first
birth, and safer for next
births,
than a
hospital setting.
None of this surprises me, but I think he's more likely to find stories of mothers who went the
home birth route as the result of a negative
hospital birth than the other way around.
Home birth is also more economical
than a
hospital birth, usually costing well under $ 4,000 as compared to a
hospital which can cost over $ 10,000.
It doesn't sound as though your situation was any different having a planned
hospital birth than it would have been had you been planning a
home birth.
Yet another study, this one consisting of every
birth in The Netherlands over two years, demonstrates that
home births are safer
than hospital births.
Birth centers are equipped with way more monitoring machines and on - hand medication than a home birth ever could but meant to feel more homey than a hosp
Birth centers are equipped with way more monitoring machines and on - hand medication
than a
home birth ever could but meant to feel more homey than a hosp
birth ever could but meant to feel more homey
than a
hospital.
Flint and colleagues suggested that when midwives get to know the women for whom they provide care, interventions are minimised.22 The Albany midwifery practice, with an unselected population, has a rate for normal vaginal
births of 77 %, with 35 % of women having a
home birth.23 A review of care for women at low risk of complications has shown that continuity of midwifery care is generally associated with lower intervention rates
than standard maternity care.24 Variation in normal
birth rates between services (62 % -80 %), however, seems to be greater
than outcome differences between «high continuity» and «traditional care» groups at the same unit.25 26 27 Use of epidural analgesia, for example, varies widely between Queen Charlotte's
Hospital, London, and the North Staffordshire NHS Trust.
Conclusions: Low risk women in primary care at the onset of labour with planned
home birth had lower rates of severe acute maternal morbidity, postpartum haemorrhage, and manual removal of placenta
than those with planned
hospital birth.
In my area, we have a large plain population that will
birth at
home regardless, so it's safer to have regulated CNMs with
hospital privileges doing it
than the underground midwives some would otherwise turn to.
I am not opposed to your conclusion that
hospital births are general better
than home births but this site fails to cover critical issues.
If ALL
births were done at
home, you'd have five times as many dead babies
than you'd have when compared to ALL
births done in a
hospital.
That's a maternal death rate at
home birth more
than 20 TIMES HIGHER
than the maternal death rate in the
hospital.
But saying
home birth is safer
than giving
birth in a
hospital is just ignorant.
But it wasn't safer
than a
hospital birth, at least not if the definition of safety is was your baby more at risk of dying because she was born at
home.
By the way, a great book by another skeptical OBGYN is called «Born in the USA» only he's skeptical of medicalized
birth because he's a clinical scientist as well, unlike our author here and he's realized that
home birth is safer
than hospital birth according to peer - reviewed large scale studies.
Home birth with a midwife, apprentice, doula,
birth photographer etc. isn't following his «mammalian model» anymore
than a lady delivering in a
hospital.
To put this into context, over time, Dr Amy has presented several different lines of hard evidence that the death rate for babies is higher in
home birth than it is at
hospitals, in America.
Get out of here «
home birth momma,» you annoying, «I gave
birth at
home so I am better and stronger
than women who gave
birth in
hospitals big pharma derp» cow.
However, MORE people (per capita) have devastating
home birth experiences — ending with dead babies or babies with brain damage or permanent nerve damage —
than hospital births.
Yes, a
home birth with a competent attendant would be safer
than an unattended
home birth or an incompetent attendant, but it won't be and can't be as safe as a
hospital birth.
Where you've gone wrong is in claiming that
home birth is no more risky to the baby's life and brain function
than hospital birth is.
Most of the research on
home births in the developed world has found that infant and maternal mortality rates are the same, if not better,
than hospital rates.
All of this, along with improvements in technology, has contributed to making
home births just as safe, if not safer
than hospital births.
Women who started
birth at
home were on average older, of a lower socioeconomic status and higher educational achievement, and less likely to be African - American or Hispanic
than women having full gestation, vertex, singleton
hospital births in the United States in 2000.
Even the World Health Organization has said that there is no proof that
hospital births are safer
than home births in the developed world.
Many women find the
home birth experience to be a much more tranquil and enjoyable experience
than a
hospital birth.
Home births (relative risk [RR], 10.55) and
births in free - standing
birth centers (RR, 3.56) attended by midwives had a significantly higher risk of a 5 - minute Apgar score of 0 (P <.0001)
than hospital births attended by physicians or midwives.