Hospital births no more dangerous than home birth, says British Medical Journal
Okay, that’s not how the British Medical Journal announced it, but I couldn’t resist. Specifically, the study showed that when parents plan to give birth at home (as we did), even if they have to go to the hospital later (as we did), they are subject to fewer interventions, such as epidurals, episiotomies and caesarian sections.
Midwives transfered their clients to the hospital about 12% of the time, but only considered it urgent in 3.4% of the cases. Even after the transfer, intervention rates were much lower for the women who had planned a home birth than those who had planned a hospital birth: more than ten times lower for some procedures. “Compared with the relatively low risk hospital group, intended home births were associated with lower rates of electronic fetal monitoring (9.6% versus 84.3%), episiotomy (2.1% versus 33.0%), caesarean section (3.7% versus 19.0%), and vacuum extraction (0.6% versus 5.5%).”
But that’s not the part I thought was most interesting. The study shows, perhaps without meaning to, that with all the interventions and medical additions that happen in a hospital delivery room, childbirth is not safer there than it is at home. But maybe not any less safe. According to the study. Just less enjoyable.
The study concludes, “Planned home birth for low risk women in North America using certified professional midwives was associated with lower rates of medical intervention but similar intrapartum and neonatal mortality to that of low risk hospital births in the United States.”
Babylune in Ontario says that midwives there can’t meet the demand. What would the demand be in the US if parents here knew more about the home birth option?
June 2nd, 2007 at 2:37 am
I think you are providing a service by talking about the issue of midwife-attended home birth! Many doctors are ignorant of the safety aspects and actively discourage their patients from learning more.
With super bugs and other antibiotic-resistant infections in the hospitals, I am avoiding hospitals even more.
June 2nd, 2007 at 9:03 am
As hard as our labor was, dealing with the hospital was even worse.
June 2nd, 2007 at 12:05 pm
Amen. None of my kiddos were born in a hospital, and I’m so happy I educated myself before just accepting the “status quo” U.S. hospital birth.
Thank you for posting this.
June 3rd, 2007 at 9:00 am
As a labor doula I had to study about the common hospital interventions, even more so because while I was training I was pregnant with my second child. A typical hospital birth, complete with all the common interventions that doctors and nurses often guilt mothers into getting or out right lie and say they need, is often more dangerous than a home birth. Our bodies know what to do just fine. Its when we try to fool nature and control the natural process that complications start to arrise. As evidenced by the US’s abizmal 30%(and growing) c-section rate.
There was a US study in 1996 that concluded the same thing. http://gentlebirth.org/ronnie/homesafe.html