I believe the scout part - I was thinking that I was cheated though, they must have brought the unicorn out after
I left at the homebirths I attended (it's cause I didn't believe hard enough.
Not exact matches
Leaving aside for the moment that this is the same group who crowed over a 20 % increase in
homebirths from from 0.56 % to 0.67 % of US births, does dismissing the absolute number of death as low fully convey what is
at stake in the decision to attempt
homebirth?
Homebirth as an option is raised often enough
at lay lead peer to peer breastfeeding support groups and when the general media touts the safety of
Homebirth i am
left shaking my head in disbelief.
Even if we just take early and late neonatal stats,
leaving out HALF of the
homebirth deaths (22/44) it's 1.29 / 1000 for MANA's almost all white, majority college educated, mostly singleton, mostly low - risk healthy women in their 20s and 30s, vs. 0.81 for EVERYONE delivering
at term in the hospital.
The public discussion
at ICAN 2011 demonstrates two things: MANA is appallingly cynical in its willingness to boast about a low C - section rate while refusing to acknowledge how many dead babies CPMs
left in their wake, and
homebirth advocates are pathetically gullible.