Hellobee Boards

Yes, I could. I actually tried with my first but had to transfer to the hospital (non-emergent) after 36 hours and being stuck at 9cm for 6 of them.

I'm amazed its illegal in some states. Over here, if you're low-risk, its the option the NHS encourage! They send a midwife - and an ambulance if you need to transfer.

I really wanted to give birth at home but DH wasn't on board. As it happened, I was high-risk anyway so I didn't qualify.

I have to say, after the event, that my birth was MESSY. I expelled waters all over the floor, bled everywhere (it was up the walls??)... I cant imagine doing that at home!

Nope. I didn't even qualify for a birth center because I'm high risk with GD. Plus I prefer hospitals for the just in case something happens scenarios.

I'm toying with it for our next one. The real reason I'm not sure is our place is small. Plus, laundry! But my midwife also has privileges at the hospital which is 1 mile away, so I fell comfortable that I could get there quickly if needed. Everything else about it sounds much better than a hospital to me. I couldn't wait to get out of there!!

ETA: I'm very pro-doctor and pro-hospital when they're necessary. I'm not shy about seeking medical attention when I need it. But pregnancy isn't an illness, and in low-risk situations, I'd be comfortable at home with a competent midwife. If we needed more intense care, great. But I hated that in the hospital, everyone kept asking me why I wanted to wear my own clothes, and why I didn't want to stay in bed or stay as long as I could. The answer was that I wasn't sick, nor was LO, and I wanted to go home to my own bed and better food so I could relax and rest!!

@LovelyPlum: Possibly. Although I read a report that claimed that every home birth saves the NHS a minimum of £380. I like to think that's not the reason....

@ms. line: I agree that I'm surprised that so many people seem to equate home birth with being unsafe. Obviously in the highest risk situations, being in a hospital could save your life. And I understand that the problem is that you don't know beforehand whether or not you'll be in that kind of a situation. On the other hand, it's not as if hospitals are cure-alls, either. In some situations, could being in a hospital save your life? Absolutely. But it's a fallacy to think that all at-home birth complications would never happen in a hospital.

Never. True story - 4 weeks before giving birth to dd1, as I walked to my breastfeeding class at a hospital 3 blocks away, a paramedic came running out of the next apt building with a baby wrapped in a blanket and flew to the hospital in an ambulance. We learned that it was a home birth gone tragically wrong and the baby died. With a hospital literally within eyesight of the building. It could have happened at the hospital too but I still can't shake that image from my head.

I had the same issues as Jessa so I am glad I was at a hospital!

@Tidybee: Goodness, that's awful. While the outcome may not have been different in hospital, you would never stop thinking "what if" if you were the parents.

@tidybee: so scary.

@LovelyPlum: I don't think that the hospital can necessarily prevent complications, they're just there to assist quickly. My low-risk pregnancy turned into a birth with many complications, including meconium, cord wrapped around baby's neck, heart decels, vacuum extraction, baby requiring recessitation, postpartum placenta issues, and a massive almost immediate infection. All of that happened within about 10 minutes. None of what happened was preventable, but we were spared disability and death by quick treatment.

@Rockies11: gah, I just lost a whole long response!! But I'm super glad that you and babe are OK.

I'm really torn about the whole thing, actually. I know that plan for the worst, expect the best is probably prudent. Births can go wrong, and when it's needed, a hospital is a huge blessing. On the other hand, it doesn't sit well with me to treat every birth as if it were one second away from everything going horribly awry. That seems to be the mentality with hospitals requiring continuous monitoring, IVs "just in case," not letting women eat during labor, etc, all so if she needs it, she can get into surgery in an instant. Where is the line? Quick access to a hospital? Already being in he facility, but not being hooked up? Being hooked up and all ready to go, in case things don't go well? Delivering in an OR? I just don't know.

I'm also chuckling to myself because I never thought in a million years that I would be a home birth supporter. I needed some interventions in my hospital birth with my first, but nothing emergent. All things considered, though, I think the hospital did me a disservice by not listening to my concerns during labor. Next time, I think I would be willing to talk about it, if possible. I really dont want to go back to the hospital, if I can avoid it. My midwife is actally trying to start a birthing center, and I would for sure love that, if the pregnancy was going well. If only we had the benefit of hindsight when making these decisions

This is just an opinion based on my experiences and what I've read but I really believe that hospitals contribute to some of the issues during birth. For example, woman goes to hospital and is placed on constant monitoring, can't leave the bed and isn't allowed to eat. Labour doesn't progress because the woman isn't allowed to move around to find HER optimal positioning, woman and baby both get tired and the cascade of interventions begin because she's also not meeting the timeline her body doesn't know it's on.

Contrast that with a woman labouring at home, comfortable in her own environment and being allowed to move and work at her own pace and with her own body and chances are none of the issues that arose in the hospital scenario are even on the radar at home.

And yes, I know this is a pretty basic and generalised scenario but it is the reality for some women.

I had a home birth, and if everything goes well next time, we'll do it again. It was an amazing experience.

As far as safety, the research indicates that in a normal pregnancy/labor, outcomes are the same (even better in some areas) than hospital birth. Midwives bring a ton of equipment that can almost always fix any "emergency" or at least make the woman/baby stable for a transfer if needed. The "what if" definitely crossed my mind, but I had to trust my body ... Thankfully, everything went well.

It's such a individual choice. And even then, I would never try for a home birth of I had anything other than a normal pregnancy.

Additionally, I purposefully chose a midwifery practice with CNM's who had hospital privileges (in case of transfer). My team is very conservative (no breech, no multiples, no pre-e, no mech, no vbac etc.). I was super close with them, reviewed their stats, talked at length about their safety protocols, and made a choice that was best for me and my baby.

@Kemma: I definitely agree about unnecessary interventions and the cascade effect. I believe women gain a lot by being informed and advocating for themselves.

But a lot of what you mentioned isn't inherent to hospitals. I think part of being informed is having a Dr and hospital who will work with you. I gave birth in a hospital with no IV, no epidural, no interventions of any kind. I could move, eat, use the shower, the hot tub, etc. My doulas were both welcome. I was able to try different positions for pushing. There was an awesome CNM on staff who was there for the birth along with my OB. I ascertained all this before going into labor. So I just want to dispel the notion that a hospital birth is incompatible with an intervention-free birth.

A lot of people talk as if hospitals are these awful places. But it has to be said, they are great for many people! I kind of thought of it as a hotel with room service, and I was so comforted by the around the clock checks on me and my baby.

Nope. Not for me.

@LovelyPlum: yeah I mean I guess I think that overwhelmingly, low risk births are going to be free of any serious complications no matter where you have them. But that doesn't change the fact that, with some low risk births, there can be serious complications that come up very rapidly, where minutes or even seconds count. But that also doesn't change the fact that it's unlikely to happen to you. I am the only person I know that had complications like I had - most people had straightforward births with few issues. I think the decision to home birth requires an understanding that that risk exists but is unlikely to happen. For me, there's no corresponding benefit from a home birth that outweighs the risk, but for other people there might be. And having a bad hospital experience prior might shift the balance! With both my kids, my hospital experience was really positive.

@Kemma: yes! I wish everyone could have that "best of all worlds" birth, whatever it means for them.

Yes, a dream birth for me would be in a tub, at home. Reality however, I was too scared to do that with my first and my second will be be an attempt at a vbac, which could of course end in another C.

I'll continue to dream and be in awe of those who are able to deliver at home

@Kemma: I met a woman on the subway who "fired" her doctor and gave birth at home with her husband, her sister and brother-in-law. They showed up at the hospital after the baby was born!

But seriously, this is a bad idea. I did work on maternal health in Ghana and do you know how many women would give anything to have a skilled attendant at birth?!?! They have seen too many babies and moms die due to no attendants or traditional birth attendants.