Where should I have the baby?

[amy g.]

It would be so I deal to have the baby at home. I have a friend who is a midwife, and another who is a doula, and they both live very close to me. The only problem is that we are 20 minutes from a not very good hospital, and an hour from a good one.

 

If I had her at the hospital, it would be the cheapest, because our insurance would pay almost everything, but Dh said that they will treat me as a very high risk patient because I'm 43 years old. That would be stressful for me.

 

I could have it at the birthing center where I had Miss Bossy, but that is an hour away, and boy, that hour felt eternal when I was in transition and puking the whole way. On the other hand, if I have to travel that far, it might be better to do it during as soon as I know I'm in labor instead of trying to have the baby at home and then traveling if I have any serious complications.

[Ria]

Why would you be treated as high risk if you have a healthy pregnancy and just show up when you are in labor?

 

Ria

[Ravin]

Because of her age, Ria. Over 35 is often considered high risk, and over forty even more so.

 

I'd have the baby at home if I was you. But this is really the sort of decision you need to make for yourself. You might want to check out the "good" hospital. Find out for sure what various policies are and how you would be treated. And what's really not so great about the not so great hospital?

 

I probably won't have the home option with my next one, because DD was born by C-section and midwives in my state aren't allowed to attend VBAC's. I may still chose to labor at home and go to the hospital at the last minute, or possibly look into the hour-away birth center.

 

Ultimately you have to do what you think will be the best balance of safety and comfort for YOU to have a good birth.

[Jann in TX]

The delivery would be treated normally. At the most they would keep the fetal monitor on you the whole time...

 

I'd call the labor and delivery department of the hospital--unless you know of an OB who works there, and ask them how you would be treated. It doesn't hurt to ask.

 

Having a baby at home without close medical care would be a red flag to me.

[Catwoman]

If I had her at the hospital, it would be the cheapest, because our insurance would pay almost everything, but Dh said that they will treat me as a very high risk patient because I'm 43 years old. That would be stressful for me.

 

I would choose the very best hospital and be very pleased to be treated as a high-risk patient. You will be treated like a queen! And if any complications arise, you will be very glad to have your specialist doctor and the best nurses there to make sure your new addition arrives safely.

 

Whatever you choose to do, I wish you the very best. :grouphug:

 

Cat

[Jami]

At the most they would keep the fetal monitor on you the whole time...

 

 

Well that right there would send me to a birth center. Did that with my first and it meant there could be no variety in laboring positions and if one wants to have a unmedicated birth, it's nice to be able to move around to find ways to ease pain.

[abbeyej]

I would have the baby at home... But then, I've already had one home birth. Have you talked to the midwife about what she thinks of your options (and the two potential hospitals)?

[Heather in Neverland]

I would choose the very best hospital and be very pleased to be treated as a high-risk patient. You will be treated like a queen! And if any complications arise, you will be very glad to have your specialist doctor and the best nurses there to make sure your new addition arrives safely.

 

Whatever you choose to do, I wish you the very best. :grouphug:

 

Cat

 

:iagree:

[specialmama]

I'd have the baby at home, too. I had both of mine at home and wouldn't hesitate unless there were prior complications during the pregnancy, or probable complications which may arise during labor and delivery.

 

How were your past labors and deliveries? Any problems?

[LaxMom]

We had a similar situation with hospital proximity and decided (it may have something to do with both of us being paramedics, and my MIL a neonatologist) that, because bad things can happen during birthing, and when they do you want fast intervention, we felt more comfortable with the birth center near the (further) hospital with the proper NICU.

 

My twins were born in that hospital - my pregnancy was high-risk as was the delivery (not the same with "advanced maternal age" and a healthy singleton, as Jann noted), but we spelled out a detailed, low intervention, birth plan (with contingencies) with our OB and I had a largely hands-off labor and delivery. (And the midwife who delivered my second daughter was on call that night and spent the majority of her time with us, as our cheerleader - she had also delivered our OB's last child, so they were on friendly terms.)

 

We have friends who delivered at another birth center, about the same distance away, and simply got a hotel room nearby when labor began, to avoid that Bay Bridge in transition horror.

 

Go with your comfort level. You're in control of your own birth experience, whether at home, in a hospital, or in a taxi. You can absolutely say no to continuous monitoring, IV, medication, bed confinement, etc. Your friend the doula can be a great asset in advocating for your wishes while you focus on your labor.

[EKS]

:iagree:

[Jennifer in MI]

Well, if it were me, I'd choose the home birth. But, I'm me!

 

I had the same dilemma with my last pregnancy. They wanted to treat me as a high-risk pregnancy because I was 37. This included the birth center! My local hospital was a bit closer - about 5 minutes. The birth center was 45 minutes away and was located in a hospital (something I had hoped to avoid!).

 

In the end, I chose both. I had a home-birth midwife who knew the birth-center midwife and they worked together. They both knew I may choose the other during delivery. I alternated the visits between them. In the end at labor, I chose homebirth! Deep down, I knew I would!

 

Questions I'd ask - can your homebirth midwife carry medicine legally to stop bleeding? (I needed it at my homebirth!!!) Actually, I'd want to know what medicine she carries at all times - but specifically, can she carry the ones to stop bleeding? Under what conditions would she call 911? When would she transfer?

 

If you decide against a homebirth, I'd go with the hospital birth with a doula who would come to your home. Go to the hospital at the LAST possible moment. That way you'd avoid all those interventions that you probably are trying to avoid!

 

Good luck with whatever you choose.

[amy g.]

I have not had any complications with any of my other pregnancies. That gives me more choices.

 

I have another midwife friend, from Oregon, visiting this weekend. I can get her opinion about my situation.

 

I will have my doula with me no matter what!

[Carrie12345]

I hated having to make a similar choice, and that's one of the reasons I think we'll wait until we move to have any more babies. I'd rather do a homebirth, but not here.

 

Dh was not thrilled with the idea of a homebirth for #4, but I could have convinced him if we were closer to a hospital. The distance (about 45 minutes without traffic) made me nervous, so I didn't bother to push the issue.

 

However, I did choose to birth in the hospital that is over an hour away. I had delivered #3 there, and I have complete faith in my midwives who only deliver in that hospital.

 

In the end, my delivery with #4 did wind up complicated. In any other hospital, I would have wound up with a c-section. With any other midwife at home, I would have been a transport that delivered en route.

 

No decision is perfect. You've got to go with your gut. I'm glad I did! :001_smile:

[tricia]

So you are considered high risk because of your age and nothing else? If so, I would birth at home. I had 3 of my 12 babies over 40 and homebirth. But it is something of course for you and your hubby to feel good about. Chances are with a good midwife and a doula you would be in good hands.:)

[kbpaulie]

My first delivery was great. My second pregnancy was great too. I labored at home and went to the hospital late into labor. What we didn't know is that my 9lb baby boy was a footling breach. Had I not been at a great hospital the outcome could have been awful. While I believe in home and birth center births, I was so grateful that my "non-complicated" pregnancy was followed up by a mid-wife supported by a skilled surgeon. I know that odds of this example are slim, but do you want to be that odd?

 

Is there someone who has hospital privledges who doesn't see you as high risk and will be your advocate against the system? The midwife who delivered our first was there from the moment we got to the hospital and helped work against the hospitals typical procedures and protocol to have the birth experience we desired.

 

Good luck and God bless!

KB

[HeatherLynn]

You know, many hospitals will allow you to follow your own plan as long as there is nothing going wrong. You as a patient ALWAYS have the right to refuse something. ALWAYS. That includes monitoring.

 

I, personally, would NEVER take the risk of delivering at home, especially that far from the hospital. That is me being a medical professional that has seen too m any home births gone wrong. This is also me as a loss Mom knowing too many other loss Mom's from my support group that had mid-wives that waited too long.

 

I am all for natural delivery in a medical setting without intervention unless it is needed. I know Baylor in Dallas even allows midwives to deliver babies in all natural setting, but everyone is there in a moments time. Sometimes that is all you have.

 

In the end, like others said, it is ultimately your choice and no one has to feel comfortable with it but you.

[Quiver0f10]

I have not had any complications with any of my other pregnancies. That gives me more choices.

 

I have another midwife friend, from Oregon, visiting this weekend. I can get her opinion about my situation.

 

I will have my doula with me no matter what!

 

I'd chose home, hands down.

[asta]

Go with your comfort level. You're in control of your own birth experience, whether at home, in a hospital, or in a taxi. You can absolutely say no to continuous monitoring, IV, medication, bed confinement, etc. Your friend the doula can be a great asset in advocating for your wishes while you focus on your labor.

 

:iagree:

 

I had it all typed up, with a copy to hubby, my midwife, and to a friend who was to be called in for emergency nursing (literally - as in feeding my baby) if something happened to me.

 

I didn't even let the hospital put an IV in me. The OB was irked that I wasn't dilating appropriately and first tried to give me pitocin, and then tried to have the nurse prep me for a c-section. When I sent her away, the OB was SO angry (he was a resident) that he wrote on my chart that the baby was in distress (it wasn't). My midwife locked him out of the room. Serious as a heart attack! She bolted the door! I could hear him raging in the hallway.

 

The whole reason I hadn't dilated along with effacing was because I had scar tissue on my cervix from an earlier cryosurgery (bad pap). All I know is that the midwife did something incredibly painful to my cervix and suddenly I was having a baby. DS was arm/shoulder over head, and came out perfectly - not even any bleeding.

 

If I were able to have more kids, I would have had them at home. And that's coming from the daughter of an OB/GYN...

 

 

asta

[sassenach]

I would go to the birthing center. Home without an acceptable back up plan would be too risky for me. Good luck!

[katemary63]

You're in control of your own birth experience, whether at home, in a hospital, or in a taxi. You can absolutely say no to continuous monitoring, IV, medication, bed confinement, etc. Your friend the doula can be a great asset in advocating for your wishes while you focus on your labor.

 

:iagree:Who the heck says you have to have a monitor on continuously? Just say no! That's what I did, 17 years ago at a major hospital in Milwaukee. I was attended my a nurse-midwife, who was employed by an OB/GYN. She was AWESOME! But even she had to "follow protocol" and so tried to check me and monitor me at times when I didn't want to be checked or monitored. I just said no.

 

I realize this could be tough for a first time mom, but your not, so you will be able to be assertive. Plus, your freinds can be there and advocate for you!

 

I would go to the best hospital available and then have the birth I planned on, knowing that if any complications would arise, both of you would be covered. I was into the natural birth, midwives and all, but also took great comfort in knowing there was medical treatment available if needed. I had wonderful, special, natural, self directed, midwife attended births IN a hospital!

 

You may be amazingly healthy, in shape and super woman, but...you are 43 and it IS a higher then normal risk situation IMO.

Edited May 9, 2009 by katemary63

[Spy Car]

I would choose the very best hospital and be very pleased to be treated as a high-risk patient. You will be treated like a queen! And if any complications arise, you will be very glad to have your specialist doctor and the best nurses there to make sure your new addition arrives safely.

 

Whatever you choose to do, I wish you the very best. :grouphug:

 

Cat

 

:iagree:

 

I made sure my wife went to one of the best hospitals in the country, and I wouldn't have it any other way, given a choice.

 

We can be "hippies" when it comes to re-cycling :D

 

Best wishes whatever you decide.

 

Bill

[TengoFive]

As a 4 time homebirther, you may discount what I say with a grain of salt. Statistically homebirth is just as safe as a hospital birth, that's in studies done comparing all planned homebirth with all planned hospital births. So, if a mother was planning to birth at home and had to transfer for complications, it was considered a home birth. When I chose to homebirth, I spent a lot of time researching my options. I found that my midwife was better equipped to handle emergencies than the local hospital, which made it a better option for me. In the case of an emergency requiring a c-section, it generally takes 45 minutes to prep a room anyway, and if one calls ahead that can be done in advance.

So, from a safety standpoint for me the hospital and home were comparable, with a homebirth being slightly safer in my area. That left only a comfort decision, and home won hands down.

[sassenach]

As a 4 time homebirther, you may discount what I say with a grain of salt. Statistically homebirth is just as safe as a hospital birth, that's in studies done comparing all planned homebirth with all planned hospital births. So, if a mother was planning to birth at home and had to transfer for complications, it was considered a home birth. When I chose to homebirth, I spent a lot of time researching my options. I found that my midwife was better equipped to handle emergencies than the local hospital, which made it a better option for me. In the case of an emergency requiring a c-section, it generally takes 45 minutes to prep a room anyway, and if one calls ahead that can be done in advance.

So, from a safety standpoint for me the hospital and home were comparable, with a homebirth being slightly safer in my area. That left only a comfort decision, and home won hands down.

 

I am not against home birth, but I think 45 min is not accurate. Well maybe at some hospitals, but not universally. I needed and received a crash c section in 10 minutes flat. I was surrounded by nurses and prepped so fast, your head would spin. I'm a gal that went on to have 2 midwife attended vbacs, so I'm so not pro med births. I just know that if needed, a csect can be done quickly and 45 min could make a huge difference.

[Amber in AUS]

I had 3 hospital births, all induced for medical reasons, all continuously monitored. My quickest labour was 1 hour from start to finish, drug free, with no intervention of any sort. It was just DH and I until we called the Dr for her to be born. My longest was 4 hours with epi and vac, she was huge and in distress and was borderline c-sec hence the epi just in case. I was glad to be in a 1st class hospital with a 1st class Dr. My OB would allow as much or as little intervention, meds etc as i wanted. It was up to me! I was able to stay as long or as little as i wanted/needed.

 

Personally I would find an OB who will let you do what you want in a hospital you like.

[Tammyla]

The delivery cost would be something I'd consider. My last pregnancy was high risk and it didn't change much of anything for me; it was more of a paperwork thing for the hospital and a little heads up for the doctors.

 

Big hug to you, I would have loved to have a Doula.:grouphug:

[ereks mom]

I would choose the very best hospital and be very pleased to be treated as a high-risk patient. You will be treated like a queen! And if any complications arise, you will be very glad to have your specialist doctor and the best nurses there to make sure your new addition arrives safely.

 

Whatever you choose to do, I wish you the very best. :grouphug:

 

Cat

 

:iagree:

 

:grouphug:

[HollyDay]

I am high risk every time I get pregnant and age only adds to it. A hospital birth is my only option.

 

But, I also have very definite ideas on what I want and do not want. Make a birth plan. Mine was 4 pages long. Discuss it with your doc. If you are really that high risk, you must have a MFM. I've found most of them are very nice and open to listening and working with you. To a point, you are still very much in control as long as you and the baby are well. But, you need to find a doc who will cooperate. Interview, interview, interview. What are you "standard procedures"? IF they start of with something like "all my ladies get an IV and enema". Then move on. Fast. Many basic level OB docs will not take high risk ladies past a certain point in their pregnancy, so consider that too.

[Garga]

I love the home birthing idea. Love it, love it, love it.

 

BUT: This is something where if there is a problem, the consequences are life-changing, traumatic and deadly. It's not like having to pay a fine at the library for an overdue book, or a parking ticket if you park in a loading zone. The consequences for a problem or mistake in birthing would be beyond anguishing.

 

I'd go to a hospital or birthing center but with the midwife and doula with clear instructions on a birthplan and the midwife/doula to stand as guards.

[HeatherLynn]

I love the home birthing idea. Love it, love it, love it.

 

BUT: This is something where if there is a problem, the consequences are life-changing, traumatic and deadly. It's not like having to pay a fine at the library for an overdue book, or a parking ticket if you park in a loading zone. The consequences for a problem or mistake in birthing would be beyond anguishing.

 

I'd go to a hospital or birthing center but with the midwife and doula with clear instructions on a birthplan and the midwife/doula to stand as guards.

 

I love the way you said this. Losing a child alters the fabric of your being. Period. I would do everything in my power to make certain all interventions were RIGHT there if they were needed. To me it would not be a gamble I was willing to take.

 

In my 6 years of working in the NICU, I have seen 5 home births gone horribly wrong and the hospital births that went bad were not anything that could have been helped (meaning, everything was done that could have been done). No study can convince me otherwise. I believe what I see, not what I hear.

 

As for our hospital reporting, BTW, a woman who comes in from a home birth or birthing center and delivers at the hospital is not considered a home birth.

[calandalsmom]

You can lose a child at a hospital too.

 

Id do the homebirth if I could figure out a good backup.

[HiddenJewel]

If you have had no complications in the past, I would choose the birthing center since you are so far from the good hospital. With my last, we were also an hour away so I choose the birthing center with the hospital 2 minutes away. I was glad I did as I hemorrhaged really badly. They didn't have to transport me but it was pretty close. I doubt the hospital would have been given me the herbal mixture that finally slowed down the bleeding. My ideal would be a hospital where my midwife had privileges and was respected.

Edited May 9, 2009 by HiddenJewel

[Quad Shot Academy]

My ideal would be a hospital where my midwife had privileges and was respected.

:iagree:

[Veritaserum]

I'd have the baby at home, too. I had both of mine at home and wouldn't hesitate unless there were prior complications during the pregnancy, or probable complications which may arise during labor and delivery.

 

:iagree: My first baby was born in a hospital and my last four were born at home. I've also attended many births (at homes and in hospitals) as a doula. There's simply a major difference in the quality of care. From my perspective, better care is received at home, where a qualified midwife (and usually 1-2+ trained assistants) monitors the situation in person. In a hospital even 1:1 continuous care is rare and technology is relied upon heavily. My midwife has excellent outcomes, including appropriate transfers. I feel fully confident that she would be able to detect potentially dangerous situations with adequate time to transport, if needed.

 

There's just no way I would feel safe in a hospital for a normal birth because in many hosptals birth is not treated normally--it's treated as a high-risk, potentially lethal event rather than a natural physiological process. While complications can and do arise, serious complications are rare. Meddling in the birth process increases the likelihood of complications. Such meddling frequently occurs during hospital births. When I'm giving birth, I'm too busy to have to say "no thanks" to the assortment of routine obstetric procedures that I know would be offered or even pushed upon me.

 

So, yes, I would give birth at home in your situation, provided everything looked good for me and my baby. :)

[LadyAberlin]

My first baby I had at home and I wouldn't do it again. He was born 3 weeks early and didn't start breathing on his own. When your baby turns blue and goes limp there is no where you would rather be than a hospital. My midwife got him breathing by giving him oxygen. Also it took 20 minutes for my placenta to come and so I was again thinking that we were going to have to go to the hospital. My second baby I had at the hospital with a Dr that said I could eat during labor and walk around. He said that if I allowed them to do a shunt in my arm then they wouldn't make me have an IV. We drove about 20 - 30 minutes to the hospital that this dr delivered at vs a 5 minute dr to the closer hospital that I could find a dr that delivered there that would allow me to birth the way I wanted to. My labor was 1.5 hrs and I had the baby within 30 mintues of getting to the hospital and so needless to say, the eating, walking and shunt never even came into play. The baby was born before the dr was able to walk into the room. The nurse was there and that was it. I thought about getting a doula, but my dh is really opinionated about natural birth so I knew he would at like a doula LOL. But if your DH doesn't want to deal with it, then I'd get a doula.

[LadyAberlin]

I just wanted to add that I have had quite a few friends that attempted homebirths and were transferred. #1 the babies head was out but the cord was in a weird position and every time she would push it cut off circulation in the umbilical cord. She needed an episiotomy and the midwife couldn't do it, so they had to transfer her. #2 friend never dilated and had to be transferred and have a c section. They found out she had some kind of infection in her muscles that kept her from dilating. That same friend tried for a v-bac at home and had to be transferred. The midwife wanted her to have a c-section quickly and the hospital kept putting her off. Finally the next morning the dr's refused to do the c-section and she was then driven to another hospital where they did the c section, and found she had an ruptured uterous and then it was a life threatening situation. #3 friend was transferred because she wasn't dilating and had to have an epidural and that got her to dilate. #4 friend was transferred and it was an emergency situation. I don't remember the details. #5 friend was transferred because her water wouldn't break and then it broke on the way to the hospital. So anyway, with my experience of a home birth and then all the people I know that were transferred I just would opt for a hospital birth. I did interview drs to decide who I would like to use. I was warey of drs that were too obliging because I didn't really believe them. I found one I liked because he was willing to do what I wanted, but did give me some warnings and said so long as things went well he was fine with what I wanted to do.

[Ginevra]

You can lose a child at a hospital too.

 

 

That is true, but if you are by election not at the hospital when everything goes wrong and your baby dies, you have the agonizing question going through your head forever, "What if I had been in the hospital? Would they have saved her?" When you go to a birth center, because you don't want "intrusive" things like continuous fetal monitoring, and then your baby's heart stops in labor, you do wonder forever, "What if I had had the fetal monitor? Would we have known in time?"

 

Ask me how I know. :angelsad2:

[Amber in AUS]

Quill, so sorry for your loss!

[CactusPair]

If it were me (and in a way it is me! LOL) I would choose to go to the birth center early in the process and labor there instead of driving the hour when you're close to birthing.

 

My 2nd choice would be the top-notch hospital, but if it's closer, I'd show up later in my labor.

 

I'm 40 and going through these decisions myself, yahoo!

 

I live 5 minutes away from a so-so hospital and 45 minutes from an excellent (best in area) hospital that uses nurse midwives in uncomplicated births.

 

I'm leaning toward the top-notch hospital with nurse midwives and leaving a bit early.

 

My dilemma is that my 1st birth was a complicated, dangerous delivery requiring expert intervention and my 2nd birth went so fast I didn't make it to the hospital at all!

 

While my accidental home birth was awesome in its own way, home birth just isn't my cuppa bec. of the unexpected problems I had with my 1st. I want someone on hand who can handle the big stuff should it arise.

 

i'm hoping for a boring birth this time!:auto:

 

best wishes in your decision making

[HeatherLynn]

That is true, but if you are by election not at the hospital when everything goes wrong and your baby dies, you have the agonizing question going through your head forever, "What if I had been in the hospital? Would they have saved her?" When you go to a birth center, because you don't want "intrusive" things like continuous fetal monitoring, and then your baby's heart stops in labor, you do wonder forever, "What if I had had the fetal monitor? Would we have known in time?"

 

Ask me how I know. :angelsad2:

 

Many many hugs.

[Catwoman]

I'm so sorry, Quill. :grouphug:

 

Cat

[Ginevra]

Thanks, Heather and Amber.

 

You know, losing a baby at birth did give me a whole different perspective on the view that doctors and nurses are just itching to intervene. They have seen it all go wrong before; they have lost babies, mothers or both. Really...I wish I could be one of those people complaining about how the continuous fetal monitoring led the bad ol' doctors to rush in for an "unnecessary" c-section. :glare:

[Joanne]

I, personally, would NEVER take the risk of delivering at home, especially that far from the hospital. That is me being a medical professional that has seen too m any home births gone wrong.

 

I don't want to disrespect anyone's experience, opinion or perspective. I certainly don't want to add to anyone's pain.

 

However, the above quote seems to assume that being in a hospital under the contemporary conditions is a "baseline" or "neutral". I don't believe the complicated labor, birth and after care situation in most hospitals is "neutral", "customizable" or "non risky". I believe that the presence of malpractice threats, the medicalization of pregnancy and birth and the general assumption that birth needs medical help are *risky*.

 

It's a false dichotomy that homebirth is risky and hospital births are not. The real evaluation is what risks are you willing to choose for your history and situation?

 

I've had a very medical hospital birth, a midwife attended hospital birth (no drugs, mostly "natural") and a homebirth.

 

I'd consider a hospital, a birth center or home depending on my situation.

[HeatherLynn]

I don't want to disrespect anyone's experience, opinion or perspective. I certainly don't want to add to anyone's pain.

 

However, the above quote seems to assume that being in a hospital under the contemporary conditions is a "baseline" or "neutral". I don't believe the complicated labor, birth and after care situation in most hospitals is "neutral", "customizable" or "non risky". I believe that the presence of malpractice threats, the medicalization of pregnancy and birth and the general assumption that birth needs medical help are *risky*.

 

It's a false dichotomy that homebirth is risky and hospital births are not. The real evaluation is what risks are you willing to choose for your history and situation?

 

I've had a very medical hospital birth, a midwife attended hospital birth (no drugs, mostly "natural") and a homebirth.

 

I'd consider a hospital, a birth center or home depending on my situation.

 

All I was trying to say was that I personally had seen too many home birth/birth center births gone wrong to take that risk. I also have lost a child that NO ONE could have saved. I just personally would want everything available so I never had to face wondering what "if" I'd been at a hospital.

[Nicole not in CA]

I am one who probably would have died if I had birthed at home. My last delivery ended up fraught with complications that would have happened no matter where I birthed (wasn't due to intervention), and as much as I love the idea of homebirths or birthing centers, I could never bring myself to do it. I am not a fan of intervention, and I have a doctor (I'm due in five weeks) who shares that mindset. I don't like hospitals, and I get nervous about the possibility of unnecessary intervention every time I am ready to deliver; but I am so thankful for the things that they can do to save lives, whether that be for the mama or the little one. After reading through many of the replies, it seems that those who have had complications or really bad experiences (hugs to those who lost their little ones) wouldn't consider a homebirth. And you never know when things may go wrong.

Edited May 10, 2009 by Nicole not in CA

[Joanne]

I don't like hospitals, and I get nervous about the possibility of unnecessary intervention every time I am ready to deliver; but I am so thankful for the things that they can do to save lives, whether that be for the mama or the little one. After reading through many of the replies, it seems that those who have had complications or really bad experiences (hugs to those who lost their little ones) wouldn't consider a homebirth. And you never know when things may go wrong.

 

Respectfully, I'd like to respond that many home, center and low medical hospital birthers do so because of complications that arise *within* the hospital system and protocol. When I researched the issue, one of the striking realities was the snowball of interventions that has become very common in hospital births and the resulting complications (most are "minor" but many are not).

[Nicole not in CA]

Respectfully, I'd like to respond that many home, center and low medical hospital birthers do so because of complications that arise *within* the hospital system and protocol. When I researched the issue, one of the striking realities was the snowball of interventions that has become very common in hospital births and the resulting complications (most are "minor" but many are not).

 

Joanne, I agree with you. I hate intervention, and I can't tell you how many times that homebirth or a birthing center has seemed so attractive to me. It will just never be a possibility for me with the type of pregnancies and deliveries that I have. And especially when one is pregnant for the first time (without a history of good pregnancies and deliveries), she really has no idea what her delivery will be like or what complications might arise. Hospitals are equipped to handle much more if things go wrong. Obviously the OP has a history of previous deliveries, and I think that is a helpful gauge. But I agree that there is way too much intervention at hospitals, and that those interventions can cause complications or problems. It's a hard decision, and there is a lot that one needs to weigh.

[Annie Laurie]

I don't want to disrespect anyone's experience, opinion or perspective. I certainly don't want to add to anyone's pain.

 

However, the above quote seems to assume that being in a hospital under the contemporary conditions is a "baseline" or "neutral". I don't believe the complicated labor, birth and after care situation in most hospitals is "neutral", "customizable" or "non risky". I believe that the presence of malpractice threats, the medicalization of pregnancy and birth and the general assumption that birth needs medical help are *risky*.

 

It's a false dichotomy that homebirth is risky and hospital births are not. The real evaluation is what risks are you willing to choose for your history and situation?

 

 

 

I agree, and very good point.

[Joanne]

Joanne, I agree with you. I hate intervention, and I can't tell you how many times that homebirth or a birthing center has seemed so attractive to me. It will just never be a possibility for me with the type of pregnancies and deliveries that I have. And especially when one is pregnant for the first time (without a history of good pregnancies and deliveries), she really has no idea what her delivery will be like or what complications might arise. Hospitals are equipped to handle much more if things go wrong. Obviously the OP has a history of previous deliveries, and I think that is a helpful gauge. But I agree that there is way too much intervention at hospitals, and that those interventions can cause complications or problems. It's a hard decision, and there is a lot that one needs to weigh.

 

Yes. Thank you for understanding!

 

Maybe a homeschool comparison will help others understand my perspective. I believe in choice in educational setting. I believe in researched decisions that match the situation for your family. I do not automatically "buy" the standard, most common response for educational settings when it comes issues to issues such as "experts", socialization, standardized testing, etc.

 

It's the same with birth settings. I believe in researched choice and don't believe in the common, automatic, standard response.

 

As I've stated, I've birthed in several settings and would remain open to all settings depending on circumstances.

[Rhonda in TX]

I am not against home birth, but I think 45 min is not accurate. Well maybe at some hospitals, but not universally. I needed and received a crash c section in 10 minutes flat. I was surrounded by nurses and prepped so fast, your head would spin. I'm a gal that went on to have 2 midwife attended vbacs, so I'm so not pro med births. I just know that if needed, a csect can be done quickly and 45 min could make a huge difference.

 

I had an emergency c-section with with my first. Doctor called "c-section" and I was down the hall and in the operating room within minutes. It was incredible.