Took the words right out of my mouth.

Well, if you birth in a hospital you DO have to drive there (and back!), so that’s like a double whammy! It’s amazing anyone escapes alive.

thats not unsafe either..

most of what they say about history is a myth..

and the problems that were there have much been fixed by cleanliness and better nutrition.

Actually, it’s not even on the top twenty list, so no, it’s not even kind of true. Unless you’re THIS OB’s patient.

True if you allow every intervention from mankind! Naturally—not so dangerous.

Exactly. That’s why it was “ONE of the most dangerous things…” The car is a lot MORE dangerous, though.

Yeah, that!

Exactally!!!!….

*shrugs*

I prefer “birth is as safe as life gets.”

Unnecessary interference is risky. And there is an awful lot of that.

Ding ding ding! You hit the nail on the head!

Took the words right outta my mouth…

Really? Unless you are one to suffer a complication that needs immediate access to a hospital.

getting out of the shower is especially dangerous when you are pregnant.LOL

I watched online and it was there. but she was talking her into an epidural, not having her water broken. and they were saying they weren’t going to turn on the epidural unless she had a cesarean. but this sort of didn’t make sense to me because I thought that one of the main reasons not to have an epidural was because of the risk of paralysis? so how is it “just as if you never had it” if the risk of paralysis is there?

That’s so perversely funny, in a way, and really goes to how tied together the fear of pain and fear of illness/injury/death are in “Western” childbirth. I mean, let’s say it was an epidural (b/c I’ve heard this reasoning with epidurals). Explain to me how pain relief (of a sort that comes with a laundry list of complications) makes childbirth SAFER. It doesn’t even always make it less painful, and only rarely impacts “safety.”

I am not having any luck googling – can you post the link here?

I can’t remember the actual stats, but I think maternal mortality actually went up the last year that they have information for. Mostly because of the way they treat women in the hospitals.

LOL. Love it.

Can you please explain why women and babies in the USA have the HIGHEST rate of maternal and neonatal death n the modern world then?

ROTFLMBO…

You say the current maternal mortality rate is 1%, and “modern obstetrics” has reduced it by 99%? Soooooo…that means that “before modern obstetrics” ***100%*** of women died in childbirth? And the neonatal mortality rate now stands at 7%, and has been reduced by 90%…which means that “before modern obstetrics” 97% of babies died as the result of being born?

If that is the case…my great-grandmother never gave birth to 4 children, and I never met her. Unless she was a zombie the whole time! Dang zombie great-grandmothers and their zombie babies!

Not to mention my own mother, who birthed me and my two younger brothers at home with lay midwives. By your figuring, since no obstetrician was involved, she is also dead…and I only had a 3% chance of surviving said birth. And my (seeming alive) mother is actually a zombie, with two zombie sons!

Oh, and then there’s me. I birthed my last child at home with a midwife. Therefore, I am also dead, and my 3-year-old daughter (who is incredibly lucky to also be in that 3% neonatal survival group) had better watch her brains around zombie mommy and grandma!

Statistically speaking, the drive to the birthing center is more dangerous than birthing with a trained midwife at a birthing center. The maternal mortality rate is higher in hospitals, but I still don’t think it’s as dangerous as driving to the hospital.

But then again, I also don’t think you’re really Dr. Amy, since this site doesn’t require any kind of verification. I could sign my comment as The Archangel Michael and there’d be nothing to stop me.

SO not in the mood for you and your kind of OB. My friend at work ended up with a c-section for a 7 lb 11 oz baby last week after a measly 8 hours of labor and no indication of fetal distress (right before dinnertime of course) There was nothing freaking wrong with her pelvis but now she thinks that she couldn’t have that baby vaginally because that’s what the all-knowing OB said. Maybe if they hadn’t augmented her labor (which hadn’t started yet really and her water was only broken for a few hours) and strapped her to a monitor and a bed- you know, all of those things that are NOT EVIDENCE BASED she might have left the hospital without major surgery.

Yep, modern obstetrics is JUST GREAT!

Thank you Doctor Amy for being a walking talking billboard-sized example of why this site is needed.

Some things that are very clear from your actions:

*You do not care about women’s health and safety as much as you care about being “right” and being acknowledged and revered as an expert. If you cared about women’s health and safety, you would not be so quick to drive them further away from the medical care (which you maintain they so desperately need) with your vitriolic rhetoric and hostile attitude.

*You view anyone with a differing viewpoint to your own as an inferior being, and elevate every thought in your mind as superior to even published medical journals.

*You seem incapable of expressing yourself with even a modicum of respect, empathy, compassion or other human qualities that women seek in those who care for them during the emotionally vulnerable time of pregnancy and childbirth.

Doctor Amy, you are a prime example of why women seek out midwives, and choose to birth in birthing centers and at home. We cannot trust that hospital-based care will treat us as human beings worthy of respect and dignity. We cannot trust that reasonable evidence-based requests for our care will be honored. We cannot expect that our questions will be answered thoughtfully and with accurate info instead of dismissed with rudeness and condescension. If you truly want women to choose to birth in the hospital (as you maintain is the only safe choice) STOP treating them like something you would scrape off your shoe, and STOP dismissing peer reviewed, evidence-based best practices as wacky fringe ideas.

I realize this appeal will be met with your trademark sarcasm and rudeness, but I feel better having gotten it off my chest. Thank you.

We really need to post a sign at this site similar to the ones at zoos: DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/narcissistic-personality-disorder/DS00652/DSECTION=symptoms

Can you explain the reasons why women died? Not just because “birth is dangerous,” but because physicians refused to follow proper handwashing techniques, even though they knew well enough to do so? Completely releasing the physician of all “guilt” in his role for the death of mother, baby or both?

I still support home birth – even though my own grandmother was a “casualty” of it, so to speak. She died of a massive infection, no doubt because of the unclean habits of her DOCTOR. He was known for not washing his hands before giving vaccinations, etc. and yet, in 1925, I doubt she had much choice other than to have him deliver her babies at home. Surely you know that many, many physicians contributed to childbed fever because they would routinely examine a patient who had just died and then move on to a living one, all the while spreading contagious disease. You wouldn’t eat a steak dinner with those dirty hands, would you? So why examine a patient with them? Doctors and nurses knew about infection control and proper handwashing as early as the turn of the century, and many of them refused to comply because of their arrogance. Think of the lives that could have saved – I’m curious if these deaths, which could have been completely prevented, are contributing to the figures that make you think “birth is dangerous.”

And I am sick to death of your blanket statements that “homebirth advocates” have no idea of blah blah blah…As if every single one of them believes that c-sections should never be performed for any reason, etc. etc. If they do, I’ve never met one of them that is that vehement about it. Where are these women, foaming at the mouth insisting that every woman should give birth at home? I take it you haven’t been reading this site for very long – sure, our comments get ‘off color,’ for lack of a better word, but when you’ve had nonsense and BS poured in both ears over the course of multiple pregnancies, you started to get a little jaded over the whole obstetric system. Your attitude certainly doesn’t help. I’ll ask it again – if you don’t support home birth, what are you doing to make a hospital birth more hospitable? You yourself admitted on your blog that inductions raise the risk of c-section, and when women are either coerced or heavily influenced to be induced, what choice to they feel they really have? At one point in a pregnancy did this cease to be “my body, my choice”? At 16 weeks, when most abortions are considered illegal? Why do I have fewer rights if I decide to keep my baby than if I wanted to terminate?

(I know … you won’t answer so why do I bother?)

Citations, please?

Childbirth is dangerous SOMETIMES, sure. There are complications that exist that do require interventions.

Childbirth becomes MORE dangerous when there is interference when it is NOT necessary. That is why the U.S.A. has such an abysmal child and maternal mortality rate. There is a very tentative balance between the necessity of intervention and excessive intervention, because a lack or an excess of intervention will BOTH increase IMR/MMR.

If childbirth really is THAT dangerous, it’s a wonder any woman has survived to take care of the babies she’s birthed.

Obstetrics is good, when it’s needed. The problem comes in when doctors want to c-section a baby that “might” be “too big” or induce because the woman is only a week “late.” Or because she’s been dilated to 2cm TWO WHOLE DAYS and nothing is happening. Situations like these are where obstetrics only contributes to the danger.

This comment has absolutely nothing to do with Home vs. Hospital birthing. Because an OB said it to a mother DURING labor I assume that she was already in the hospital. The point of this quote is that it is not something that should be told to a mother who is IN labor and has already made her choice on her place of birth.

Oh, I wish I could have been here for this roast! Unfortunately, I was otherwise occupied. I was resting in bed, enjoying my newborn baby, my fourth. Ten pounds, five ounces, thirty hours of active labour, some of which was spent in the bathtub, some of it draped over my oldest daughter’s Rody horse, five minutes or so of pushing once my midwives convinced me that I was probably a lot closer to actually *pushing* than I thought if I’d try squatting instead of staying on all fours; nuchal cord and hand, placenta about as large as the baby. No tears. High APGARs. HBAC. (In other words, “neener, neener, neener.” Yes, I’m feeling quite mature today, thank you.)

Anyway.

Your view of birth would make perfect sense if I lived in a village in the Sudan. But I don’t. I’m American, and despite my not exactly being high income (I technically qualify for Medicaid), I enjoy far better living conditions than the average woman in the third world. Hygiene and good nutrition make a huge difference. For instance, I don’t have ricketts, so my pelvis is not deformed. I’m not starved and dehydrated on a regular basis, so my tissues are elastic and healthy and I don’t risk fourth degree tears in my perineum. My midwife washes her hands, as did I when I did peri care after birth, so childbed fever was unlikely, but were I to contract it, I have ready access to antibiotics.

Most of the things we are told justify considering birth inherently dangerous, death-defying even, do not even apply in developed countries. We also have much faster access to emergency care than people do in poorer countries – we can get to a well-equipped, relatively sanitary, efficient hospital in a matter of minutes, as opposed to hours.

Other things widely advertised as risks of birth, and justifications for a ludicrously high rate of vaginal bypass operations (i.e. c-sections), such as foetal distress being indicated by the monitor (the monitor that Dr Hon himself said was never meant to be used routinely), failure to progress (in a way conforming to the Friedman scale, which was never meant to be prescriptive in the first place), cephalopelvic disproportion (which is easy to predict when a mother is on her back, narrowing her pelvic opening), etc are iatrogenic. However, I’m not sure there’s much point in belabouring the issues here, because you are reputed to not believe that anything is ever iatrogenic.

A final belated after-thought to the doctor Amy debate, which I am posting on this thread because it appears higher on the page:

Even assuming, that childbirth *IS* definitely and in all cases one of the most dangerous things a woman can do today, isn’t that beside the point? Can Dr. Amy or anyone else provide us with ANY REASON why it would be good practice to state this, even if it is fact, to a mother in the midst of labor? Any reason at all why that would be prudent or wise to say that to a birthing mother? I would think that would only frighten her and stall her labor, causing it to be more dangerous, correct? And after all, the mother in this story is doing THE RIGHT THING by birthing in a hospital, under the care of an OB and near an OR, so she has thus accepted that is that safest move, at least for herself. So, again, why state that she is in mortal danger as she copes with labor? What will that accomplish, since she is already birthing in the SAFE place?

You would think, even an OB who generally agreed with the factual correctness, would be appalled at saying that to a birthing woman. How would it help to tell that women that she is doing one of the most dangerous things she could be doing? That doesn’t seem like a standard of care OB’s should be rallying behind.

A final belated after-thought to the doctor Amy debate, which I am posting on this thread because it appears higher on the page:

Even assuming, that childbirth *IS* definitely and in all cases one of the most dangerous things a woman can do today, isn’t that beside the point? Can Dr. Amy or anyone else provide us with ANY REASON why it would be good practice to state this, even if it is fact, to a mother in the midst of labor? Any reason at all why that would be prudent or wise to say that to a birthing mother? I would think that would only frighten her and stall her labor, causing it to be more dangerous, correct? And after all, the mother in this story is doing THE RIGHT THING by birthing in a hospital, under the care of an OB and near an OR, so she has thus accepted that is that safest move, at least for herself. So, again, why state that she is in mortal danger as she copes with labor? What will that accomplish, since she is already birthing in the SAFE place?

You would think, even an OB who generally agreed with the factual correctness, would be appalled at saying that to a birthing woman. How would it help to tell that women that she is doing one of the most dangerous things she could be doing? That doesn’t seem like a standard of care OB’s should be rallying behind.

The leading cause of maternal mortality is actually homicide by an intimate partner and unfortunately obstetrics and surgery are not interested and unable to assist in this. Thank you for saving us, by the way. you are doing a great job!!!

This was supposed to be a response to”Dr.” Amy’s comment.

“Actually, sweetie, the leading causes of death in women are heart disease, cancer, stroke, respiratory diseases, alzheimer’s, injuries, diabetes, pneumonia, kidney disease, and septicemia. Childbirth is not on the list.”

Actually, sweetie, I said “young women.” You just recited the causes of death for ALL women. Go back and find the appropriate data and then get back to us.

There IS a place for obstetics. It has helped many women who truly need it. That place is usually not in the average childbirth. There is a time and place for all medicine. It’s great, it’s there when we need it. But it needs to be used in moderation.

I don’t see how a natural delivery could be dangerous for EVERYONE whether they plan it in a hospital or at home with an experienced professional midwife.

So what do you think about the studies that show similar outcomes with less intervention in birth centers and planned home birth? You can’t deny their existence.

So, what about Europe where most of the countries are homebirth and midwife friendly? And still, according to the WHO have a lower infant and mother mortality AND morbidity rate? Should we not believe their studies and literature also?

Or read the mortality data from the CDC website I cited above. Unless the CDC has begun printing homebirth literature, they’re probably reliable.

324 deaths for women aged 25-34 in 2006 from a population of 19.8 million women.

(By comparison, 1394 deaths for the same group, same year, due to problems of the circulatory system.)

CDC baby!

(Check it yourselves! http://wonder.cdc.gov/ )

Wow, so-called-Dr. Amy… Can’t believe an “actual” physician has the kind of time to sit around arguing on “bogus” websites all day. Especially with a bunch of unintelligent lunatics that will never change their minds despite the “facts” shoved down their throats. I mean, I am just a stay at home mom and I don’t even have the time to READ all of your posts, let alone type them.

You must just be a very sad, argumentative person. I always feel bad for people who feel the need to defend their personal feelings to the death. They must feel so threatened by people who are not like them. They must feel so horrible about themselves that the only way they can feel better is by trying to demean or “defeat” someone else. I am glad there are SO MANY people here for you to fight against. Hopefully they will be good therapy for you.

But wait, don’t get your panties in a wad! I am not a homebirthing wacko. I have chosen to give birth twice in a hospital. Though one of those was a VBAC, whew, really dodged a bullet with that one, huh? Can’t believe my baby and I came out alive.

My first baby was a c-section for a very important reason- massive placental abruption. I am thankful for the OB that sliced me open a withdrew my precious, albeit BLUE, child and handed him off to the waiting NICU team? I think it goes without saying. Do I hate doctors or hospitals, um no. My child and I would both most likely be dead if I had lived without access to either.

Yes, there are some dangers that are associated only with childbearing, but the vast majority of women still choose to have children. The children are worth the possible risk. The risk of my life and my child’s life was NOT associated with child BIRTH, but with PREGNANCY- which despite medical science is still the only way to bring children into this world. Are you going to argue no one ever become pregnant again? No, because bye-bye 90% of OBs… Not to mention the rest of the species. Are you going to argue everyone should have a c-section? I hope not, since you surely can’t skew the data to show that a c-section is safer than an uncomplicated vaginal delivery. We all KNOW you aren’t going to argue for vaginal delivery, since it is the most dangerous thing a woman can do today. What is your recommendation, Dr. Amy?

Because there are hundreds of women waiting here for you to argue it with.

LOL LOL LOL

“…it happens again and again?”

Thank you for your scientifically-based contribution.

Lots of things happen “again and again.” Is that a number like 1%? 10%? 60%? 99%?

And it’s all in the eye of the beholder, isn’t it? The vast majority of homebirthers I know are completely open to going to the hospital if necessary. How is that “fixing” some “stupid” decision, when it was part of the birth plan from the beginning? By that logic, women who plan to go to the hospital and give birth vaginally are like, totally stupid and being hypocritical when they “go running” to the OR instead for emergent C/S.

Do you call the fire department everytime you cook? No because its silly to call on professional assistance when nothing is wrong. You could start a fire and burn your house down from cooking, just like you could die in childbirth. Thankfully when something does go wrong there are people to call who are trained to fix it.

In the early 1980′s when the c-section rate was only 20% modern obstetrics was probably helping more than it was hurting, But it has gone too far and doctors need to learn when they are needed and when they should not interfere. A c-section rate above 15% is criminal. Nationally we are at 31% On Long Island we are over 40%. It is time to use statistics to evaluate what is and what is not helpful. Many things in modern obstetrics are NOT helping.
You can’t justify ALL of modern obstetrics by pointing to the overall improvement. You have to justify each and every interventing and that is not being done!
You can’t justify sectioning a woman for big baby based on an ultrasound that said 10 lbs when baby turns out to be 8 lbs.
And you can’t justify this doctor’s rudeness. No amount of improvement in outcome justifies a doctor being rude to a patient. First and foremost this site is about how amazingly rude doctors can be.

“Doctors who treat their patients views and wishes with disdain and condescension.”

How would you treat people who claim to know more than you obstetricians life and death issues, and don’t have a clue that most of what they think they “know” is factually false?

Oh Please do not tell me you are backing yourself up with the Wax paper – which should have NEVER been accepted and published in the fist place due to its flawed method of data collection! Many of the papers included in Wax’s analysis should have NEVER been included. One cannot compare a planned home birth to an unplanned one. it is comparing apples to oranges

What, kind of like the book you authored on childbirth? Looking at it it doesn’t look very scientific or esoteric, but rather a layperson’s guide on childbirth. Maybe based on fact, maybe based on your own opinion. (I’m sure there’s no chapter on home birth.)

The issue with AMERICAN homebirth literature is the retrospective and selective data and inherent bias within the literature.

My toddler does the same thing when I say something she doesn’t agree with. She repeats what she believes and stamps her feet really hard. Maybe if you stamp your feet hard enough it might come true. It doesn’t work for my toddler, but it might for you. Give it a try.

You insist we’re all uneducated, and yet there are certainly those among us (myself included) who boast post-secondary degrees in specialties that do give us particular knowledge of this issue.

Of course, that would likely be why you didn’t bother to respond to my post–it’s too hard for you to argue with other people who actually have science and not just “standards of practice” (many of which are antiquated and worsen outcomes) on their side.

I may move to Europe to have my kids, it seems the medical community there are more in favor of actually letting a woman do what she feels comfortable with there.

Yes, I’ve remarked that I’d like to stay in England as long as I’m having kids (I’m American, but my 2 children have been born in England).

Gemma, I’m an American living in the U.K. and while I’m ready to return home now I thank my stars every day that I had my 2 babies in the U.K. where I was delivered by midwives. There is no questions that i would’ve had a c-section with my first and then probably been refused a VBAC with my second.
I’m going to have my 3rd at home! with 2 attending midwives who’ve most likely seen me through my pregnancy.
it took a long time to get past the fear of needing more medical interventions from my American brain, but going by my second I went to hospital gave birth within 2 hours without interventions and stood and and went home. Brilliant. I’m still in disbelief that childbirth can be so easy if left alone.

Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, August 1985. p.390-394

no statistics, huh?

http://www.imbi.uni-freiburg.de/OJS/cca/index.php/cca/article/viewArticle/4165
“Results: The perinatal mortality was not significantly different in the two groups (OR=0.87, 95% Cl 0.54-1.41). The principal difference in the outcome was a lower incidence of low Apgar scores (OR=0.55; 0.41-0.74) and a lower incidence of severe lacerations (OR=0.67; 0.54-0.83) in the home birth group. Medical interventions were much less common in the home birth group: induction (statistically significant ORs in the range (0.06-0.39), augmentation (0.26-0.69), episiotomy (0.02-0.39), operative vaginal birth (0.03-0.42) and cesarean section (0.05-0.31). No maternal deaths were observed in any of the studies. Some of the differences may be partly due to bias. However, the findings regarding morbidity are supported by randomized clinical trials of elements of birth care relevant for home birth, and the finding relating to mortality is supported by large register studies comparing variously specialized hospital settings.”

http://oregonstate.edu/cla/anthropology/reproductive_lab/sites/default/files/Johnson_Daviss_2000.pdf
Conclusions: 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.”

BMJ study:
Results 655 (12.1%) women who intended to deliver at home when labour began were transferred to hospital. Medical intervention rates included epidural (4.7%), episiotomy (2.1%), forceps (1.0%), vacuum extraction (0.6%), and caesarean section (3.7%); these rates were substantially lower than for low risk US women having hospital births. The intrapartum and neonatal mortality among women considered at low risk at start of labour, excluding deaths concerning life threatening congenital anomalies, was 1.7 deaths per 1000 planned home births, similar to risks in other studies of low risk home and hospital births in North America. No mothers died. No discrepancies were found for perinatal outcomes independently validated.

Conclusions 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.

There was also an Oregon State University study proving the safety, but I can’t find it. Maybe someone else bookmarked it?

<3 it.

I love it when a doctor proves another wrong using the idiot doctor’s words against them <3

For the record, "modern obstetrics" didn't SAVE that many women. The realization that germs exhist did. Don't get me wrong, OBs have their place for high-risk cases and when something goes very wrong and a c-section is needed. But to say that there are two options, unsafe birth in nature and safe birth with an OB is just a blatant lie and Dr. Amy has ignored the fact that only a small % of women need any more care than a midwife can offer.
Common…at least admit that with a death rate of under 1% when proper prenatal and birth care are given, you can hardly say that "Birth is the most dangerous thing a woman can go through"
Lying to your patients doesn't get you any points.

“You say that “in nature” the rate of maternal death is 1%. You say in the last 100 years “modern obstetrics” has reduced it by 99%. IS 1% with a REDUCTION OF 99%.
[...]
“Are you honestly saying that just by the *existance* of “modern obstetrics”, women not being attended by ANY birth professional are in less danger of dying?”

With all respect, I think that you are misreading her post. She is saying that still today the rate “in nature,” (that is, without access to modern obstetrics) the rate is 1%. For example, Sierra Leone currently has one of the higest death rates with 1,800 maternal deaths per 100,000 births, which is actually closer to 2%, but then sadly there is a lot more wrong than just a lack of access to care going on there.

So modern obstetrics hasn’t reduced the rate to 1% in nature but rather that access to modern obstetrics has reduced the rate from 1% in nature to the current rates of countries with decent healthcare systems and OB access.

Current maternal mortality rate in the US as of 2005 was 11 per 100,000 births. I’m not sure what the rate was a hundred years ago, but just to illustrate the math, if it was 1,100 per 100,000 births then (or just slightly over 1%), then that would mean it is now 1,089 per 100,000 less than it used to be. 1,089/1,100 = 0.99, or a 99% reduction.

“Dr.” Amy won’t respond to any one that has the medical evidence to pove her wrong… EVEN HER OWN ‘peers!!!” I believe she is just a mouthpiece for AMA and ACOG, trying to further bully and degrade women into believing their faulty press…. Remember folks, she never really practiced medicine with real patients. Here is her own bio off of her website: “Dr. Amy Tuteur is an obstetrician gynecologist. She received her undergraduate degree from Harvard College in 1979 and her medical degree from Boston University School of Medicine in 1984. Dr. Tuteur is a former clinical instructor at Harvard Medical School. She left the practice of medicine to raise her four children. ”

see? told you.

This would be a fitting analogy if wearing seat belts was known to be harmful to children. The benefits of wearing a seat belt clearly outweigh any risks. This is not always the case with procedures used in birth.

Minimize the risk, huh? Risk of what? Certainly not the risk of tearing since so many OBs refuse to support the perineum and cut unnecessary episiotomies. Certainly not c-section. The rate is 2-3 times what is considered “safe” and continues to rise. Certainly not the distress of the baby. They continue to use pitocin for inductions that are not medically indicated and crank it up as high as possible until a c-section is needed. What exactly are they trying to minimize? The death rate hasn’t declined as all this things rise, so if the death rate is what they are trying to minimize, they are failing miserably and they need to look back to natural birth which has better statistics – no matter where it’s attended.

lol…or Bill O’Riley Hey, there always has to be some fanatic in each debate who spends more time making an idiot of him- or herself, right? She’s nicely set herself up to be that. What I don’t get is how she has any time to practice or do research if she’s trolling around on the internet all the time looking for a fight?! I feel bad for her children:( What a hateful bitch to have as a mother…she takes the “I’m right because I’m older and have been through more school” to a WHOLE new extreme! As if there were nothing else for her to learn. I bet she hasn’t read a single one of the studies that has come out in support of homebirth.
If you Google her, you can’t find a single post in support of her. It’s all just post after post discrediting her and her lack of facts to back her up. It seems she missed that statistics class that teaches you can say anything you want but it doesn’t mean squat until you have a non-biased part doing the study.

I just don’t understand why people get so angry. She’s clearly an idiot who, instead of looking at both sides to see if she’s right, just goes looking for whatever might substantiate her claims. That’s not research. I wish she could meet Marsden Wagner. I bet she’d think he’s somehow delusional. An OB/GYN in practice AND research, never took off time to raise kids so he’s been in the field for decades. the WHO’s Directer of Women’s and Children’s Services. Now the number one OB called in to testify in obstetrical court cases. He says OBs have no place in low-risk birth
But I bet she knows more because she hasn’t been working as much as he has so she probably has more time to research

Yes, all the time. I bet they’re bestest friends!

Somewhat. She also reminds me of “Doctor” Laura.

At least she doesn’t remind me of Glenn “Abilify Poster Boy” Beck… yet…

Exactly. Thank you!

I just wanted to say that I think this is the best extension of this analogy.

Further, I noticed everytime Amy uses the seat belt analogy, she specifically uses the situation of buckling up children. She sees it as the Doctors are superior to the patients, not that the mothers are decision makers in their own right that can weigh the risks on their own and make a decision.

Awesome analogy.

Too bad dr amy is not here anymore to say something asinine and nonsensical in response

This mother certainly didn’t need to hear this while she was hypnobirthing, in an attempt to scare her into submitting to whatever the doctor wanted her to submit to, that she obviously did not need since a REAL professional came along and supported her. Shame on the doctor.. for shame..

And shame on you Dr. Amy for defending that sort of bullying. But, it really doesn’t surprise me that you would sink so low. I bet you’d have stood there and talked about baby’s dying and seat belts and how dangerous what she was doing was in order to break her concentration so you could try to talk her into.. whatever she did not need.. as well.

This is an excellent analogy. Can I perhaps excerpt it on my FB fan page?

You rock.

Ebeth,

Because of your story and a couple of near misses I myself have been at, I have changed my tune from “Trust birth,” to “Respect birth.” (Thank you Navel Gazing Midwife!) It is important to realize that there will be, for some women, complications, and that safety is an absolute priority. You have to find a midwife who feels the same. No agendas!

With all due respect to everything you went through, your story doesn’t disprove anything anyone has told us about the safety of low-risk homebirth. For SOME women, birth is risky. Those women are usually turned down by good midwives for homebirth care. It sounds like the same went for you. You developed complications and decided on the hospital in case those complications mandated a c/s. Thankfully, you were in the hospital when that c/s became necessary.
However, to use your story as some sort of “proof” that all birth is inherently risky is a falacy. It’s like saying “That guy drove drunk, all driving is high-risk.” Sure, there’s always a bit of risk the minute you walk out your door – hell, there’s risk staying home. But you can’t use your story to tell other women that a low-risk homebirth is “the most dangerous thing they will go through”.
I think the problem is that Dr. Amy just doesn’t understand midwifery. Most are well-trained, studied women. They carry with them all the same instruments and drugs an OB has for smaller problems like postpartum hemorrhage and everything they need to revive mother or baby, including intubation. And they can all see that “emergency” coming half-an-hour away. Transfers happen before the c-section is immanent. They don’t sit at home or in an office waiting for the nurse who is watching a monitor to catch bad fetal heart rhythms, then call the doctor to come and make an assessment. They are there the whole time, using their ears to listen to the baby’s and mother’s heart tones always knowing that as long as heart rates return to normal between contractions, everyone is fine.

I’m sorry that you have been through so much in your life. But your birth isn’t at all proof that anything can happen at any time and women should therefor only birth within feet of an OR
I respect Birth. I know my Body. I trust my Midwife.

She decided to write a blog post that day about homebirthing and wanted some quotes that she could pull from this “debate” and misquote them to show how “silly and stupid” all NCB supporters are. She kept answering for awhile after posting her blog post, but disappeared and hasn’t been back since.

I think you hit the nail on the head. The quote had nothing to do with home birthing. It was about an OB sabotaging a woman’s efforts to hypnobirth in a hospital setting.

And in her zeal to defend her profession, she missed the entire context, and ironically, ended up coming across as the very embodiment of what was wrong with the quote in the first place.

I’ve since gone over to Dr. Amy’s blog, to see what her deal is, and to see if perhaps I’d bee misjudging her. Nope. I was floored by how incredibly nasty the tone of virtually every post was. It’s like she’s going out and scouring the internet for things to bash in the nastiest tone, possible. If it seems remotely “crunchy” or like something a home birther *might* be into, Dr. Amy is going to do a blog post about how stupid/dangerous/sanctimonious/ignorant/pretentious it is. What is the point of that? We talk about supporting women and their choices, and here is an OB that wants to do nothing but tear down any woman who makes a choice she wouldn’t. How is that helpful?

“What on EARTH is she defending?!”

You’re joking right?

It’s hard to imagine I could make my point any more obvious than it is. Which words in “childbirth IS one of the most dangerous things a woman can do” are you having trouble with?

The most amusing of the many inadvertently hilarious comments here are those from women who boast that I haven’t changed their mind. What made you think I was trying to change your mind? I had absolutely no hope of changing the minds of people who pat themselves on the back for being “educated” when they don’t know anything about science, statistics, obstetrics, and even basic math concepts like percent.

And obviously I have no hope of changing the minds of people who are so pathetically uneducated as to make statements like this:

“And where statistics are concerned, they’re all trash. I don’t care what study or college or group states them, they’re all trash. Yes, they can give us general ideas of how things are trending, but putting our faith in “cold, hard, statistics” is be ignorant”?

You can’t use logic to change the minds of people who don’t understand logic and think inanities like “trust birth” are profound observations.

I was trying to discredit NCB advocates by highlighting their lack of basic knowledge, basic logic and their inability to think critically. You couldn’t have been more helpful. You fell all over yourselves with inane and illogical comments while simultaneously patting yourselves on the back for your complete ignorance. Way to go!

I will keep this site in mind when people ask why no one takes homebirth and NCB advocates seriously. Nothing I could possibly say about you is as damaging to your reputations than what comes out of your own mouths.

“what YOUR PEERS posted”

What, specifically, did they post?

Why? You never once prove where your claims come from. Why should anyone else?

Ha! You mean like here where you stated the specific claim and the paper that carries it:

“As a matter of fact childbirth IS one of the most dangerous things a woman can do.
Childbirth is and has always been, in EVERY time, place and culture, a leading cause of death of young women. And of the eighteen years of childhood, the day of birth is the most dangerous by far.
In nature, the neonatal mortality rate is 7% and the maternal mortality rate is 1%. Childbirth is far safer now because modern obstetrics has decreased the neonatal mortality rate 90% and the maternal mortality rate by 99% in the past 100 years.”

You demand that people back up their claims and when they do (scroll up you lazy pig, there’s a post with THREE reported studies that found homebirth to be as safe as hospital birth) you don’t respond. But you haven’t yet listed any of your own sources.

Not only are you a hypocrite, you’re a total joke!

Oh, what the hell, I’ll do the work for you because I’m just that nice:) Here’s what Dr. Dunn posted, links included:

http://www.imbi.uni-freiburg.de/OJS/cca/index.php/cca/article/viewArticle/4165
“Results: The perinatal mortality was not significantly different in the two groups (OR=0.87, 95% Cl 0.54-1.41). The principal difference in the outcome was a lower incidence of low Apgar scores (OR=0.55; 0.41-0.74) and a lower incidence of severe lacerations (OR=0.67; 0.54-0.83) in the home birth group. Medical interventions were much less common in the home birth group: induction (statistically significant ORs in the range (0.06-0.39), augmentation (0.26-0.69), episiotomy (0.02-0.39), operative vaginal birth (0.03-0.42) and cesarean section (0.05-0.31). No maternal deaths were observed in any of the studies. Some of the differences may be partly due to bias. However, the findings regarding morbidity are supported by randomized clinical trials of elements of birth care relevant for home birth, and the finding relating to mortality is supported by large register studies comparing variously specialized hospital settings.”

http://oregonstate.edu/cla/anthropology/reproductive_lab/sites/default/files/Johnson_Daviss_2000.pdf
Conclusions: 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.”

BMJ study:
Results 655 (12.1%) women who intended to deliver at home when labour began were transferred to hospital. Medical intervention rates included epidural (4.7%), episiotomy (2.1%), forceps (1.0%), vacuum extraction (0.6%), and caesarean section (3.7%); these rates were substantially lower than for low risk US women having hospital births. The intrapartum and neonatal mortality among women considered at low risk at start of labour, excluding deaths concerning life threatening congenital anomalies, was 1.7 deaths per 1000 planned home births, similar to risks in other studies of low risk home and hospital births in North America. No mothers died. No discrepancies were found for perinatal outcomes independently validated.

Conclusions 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.

There was also an Oregon State University study proving the safety, but I can’t find it. Maybe someone else bookmarked it when it came out?

And yet you STILL haven’t backed up any of your claims.
And say whatever you want about Marsden Wagner…he was in practice longer than you were. He was in research longer than you were. And he was the Director of Women and Children Services longer than you were. It’s going to take more than claiming you know more than everyone on this site to make anyone believe you know more than Dr. Wagner.
When was the last time you were asked to testify in a court case? He has testified in many.
Claiming you know more than everyone else doesn’t make it true.

1) “Which countries?”

Even according to the World Health Organization’s statistics for the year 2000 (which is granted a little outdated, but not much has really changed), the perinatal mortality rate for the United States was 7. Still higher than, as I mentioned before, Singapore. Midwifery in Singapore is government supported. The American model supporting obstetricians providing care for low risk women is putting women at risk more than it is saving them. Obstetricians belong in the operating room, not in the delivery room for an uneventful pregnancy and delivery. It is a disservice to OBs and to mothers to have it any other way. Also, to refute your claims against the Netherlands, they have a perinatal mortality rate of 1: scarcely one above the United States. Clearly, we’re not seeing a tripling of perinatal mortality in the Netherlands because of the abundance of homebirth there.

And Canada, which does have midwifery as an option, and does have lower rates of caesarians and interventions, is a 6. Not much better, but still slightly better than the knife-happy American hospital system.

Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands are among 3 of the most commonly touted “models” of midwifery care. Denmark and the Netherlands sit at an 8 for neonatal mortality, Sweden sits at a very impressive 5. This is using the definition you provided for perinatal mortality from the organization you also used. Given that the United States sits above 5 and barely below 8, where are you getting that these midwife-based models of care are doing more harm than the American system?

2) Right, because I’m sure Marsden Wagner wasn’t making a killing working for the W.H.O. in such a respectable capacity for so long. And I’m sure that he couldn’t have made money hand over fist doing research. Oh, right, he’s not an OB: How can he research obstetricians? I have news for you, Amy: You don’t have to be an OB to read and understand the literature, nor do you have to be an OB to take a critical eye to an issue and provide excellent, objective research. I would draw your attention to the burgeoning body of research in medical and reproductive anthropology that is adding volumes upon volumes of qualitative AND quantitative data to questioning biomedical models of care. I can adequately question Dr. Wagner’s claims, given that I have access to a huge academic library and every online journal through EBSCOHOST, JSTOR, etc. And he’s still providing way better data than you ever have.

3) “Says who?”
2003 Cynthia Berg, et al. Magnitude of Maternal Morbidity During Labour & Delivery: United States 1993-1997. American Journal of Public Health 93(4).
“Maternal morbidity during delivery is frequent and often preventable. Reducing maternal morbidity is a national health objective, and its monitoring is key to improving maternal health.”

I’d be interested to know a few things about your “Listening to Mothers” survey. Who received this survey? Who responded to it? What income brackets did they fall into? Did they use midwives with hospital privileges, doctors, or OBs? Did they have low-risk or high risk pregnancies? Did they have unnecessary interventions with adverse outcomes? Were they *aware* that interventions done to them might have caused adverse outcomes they experienced, or did they believe it when a doctor spouted about how they saved their life, when in fact they were the ones who put them at risk?

A survey is a survey of the experiences of people on the ground. For someone who doesn’t like what the laymans here have to say (nor the professionals…) you are giving credence to a survey that was conducted strictly among LAYMANS. You are being hypocritical. You cannot continue to waver back and forth with what is credible and not credible to you: You have to pick one and stick with it, before it becomes even MORE clear that you are simply selling the status quo.

I should mention I have an excellent obstetrician who told me in no uncertain terms about my desire to avoid future c-sections. “I can tell you what the standards of practice are. I can’t tell you whether or not the scientific research agrees with what those standards of practice are.”

Oh, so now you don’t think family practitioners and general practitioners aren’t as smart as you either?
For 15 years, Dr. Marsden Wagner was the director of Women’s and Children’s Health in the World Health Organization. How long did you hold such a position centering around women’s health?

Does everyone has to be an OB to be a good researcher?

You have to be the most arrogant doctor I’ve ever met. You are just unbelievably full of yourself!!

I respect the surgical skills of an OB. But they are not necessary to be a baby catcher, nor to do research about maternity care.

Marsden Wagner, MD, is a perinatologist and perinatal epidemiologist from California and an outspoken supporter of midwifery. He was director of Women’s and Children’s Health in the World Health Organization for 15 years. From his current home in Takoma Park, Maryland, Marsden travels the world to talk about improving maternity care, including the appropriate use of technology in birth and utilizing midwives for the best outcomes. He raised four children as a single father. His books, Born in the USA, Creating Your Birth Plan, and Pursuing the Birth Machine, are invaluable for anyone involved in birth.

You know what? Some people die. Some babies cannot survive the rigors of birth. Some women cannot survive the rigors of birth. Some doctors are willing to do whatever it takes to save extreme preemies, and babies who will ultimately have no quality of life.

So, okay.

I had complete placenta previa and developed a conditions euphemised as “unstable hemorrhage” at 32 weeks, 4 days. The rigors of labor and birth would have made us both bleed to death.

It doesn’t follow from this that I’m not sufficiently fit for survival, or that my daughter, after a period during which she did require a lot of medical support, isn’t sufficiently fit. It certainly isn’t true that my daughter has no quality of life.

Birth is a situation in which a large number of accidents can occur. Perfectly healthy babies in perfectly healthy mothers can be malpositioned, or have cord accidents. Placentas can fail to work as advertised.

No doctor can predict what a premature infant’s quality of life will ultimately be. There is certainly a wide variety of outcomes, from the developing world, where babies born as late as 36 weeks are generally expected to die, to places with so many NICU resources available that babies who have made it past 24 weeks gestation stand a very good chance of having few lasting medical problems.

The wonderful thing about modern obstetrics is that it is so often possible to get patients past these crises involved in birth and enable them to live the rest of their lives. When I started to bleed out, I didn’t have to shrug and say my goodbyes while thinking, hey, at least it’s not a plane crash. I got to a hospital, and now I get to do my best to die of old age. We can’t choose our deaths, but we don’t have to lie down and submit to them when we think they might be coming.

While I think that the practice of obstetrics could be much improved, and that hands-off care should be practiced more often, by more professionals, I also think that the wholesale rejection of modern obstetrics (as embodied by comments like your opening “some people die”) is irrational.

uh huh…and it also refers to the proverbial “weeding of the heard”. The weakest are the first to go…the ones who are too young or sick to be born and left in an incubator for months, then be brain damaged for the rest of their lives. Not everyone would consider that “fittest” and certainly in nature they would be the first to go.

I DO understand what survival of the fittest means. It means nature not allowing creatures with poor genetics to survive and pass those genes along, because if they do, it weakens the species.

And yes, I am very aware that it sounds callous as hell. That’s because Nature IS callous.If it weren’t, no species would survive. But we keep on finding new ways to save those who couldn’t have survived without extreme measures, as well as lengthening the life span.This adds an undue burden on families, communities, and society as a whole. But, we’re afraid of death and feel as if we have every right to try to overcome it- at ANY cost- even when the cost to the species as a whole is too great.

And just because this is a civilized society does NOT mean we are not still subject to natural law.

My mw with my second pregnancy agreed that, had I had a supportive mw with me with my first, it’s doubtful I would’ve had an assisted delivery. So I agree that it’s doubtful all would’ve needed those interventions.

“Oh and does Michel Odent not count as an expert of sound research/opinion?”

If you mean as an expert in childbirth, then the answer is “No”.

Michel Odent is trained as a general surgeon, and is registered thus with the British physician registry. He is not an OB, and is not trained in obstetrics, although many people assume that he is.

You can check the registry for yourself:

http://www.gmc-uk.org/

As for his research theories, I doubt that a rational, qualified, OB would leave his wife to freebirth alone at home, in order to preserve the “mystery” of their sexual relationship as he did with the birth of their 3rd child in 1985. This alone discredits Michel Odent in my eyes.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-559913/A-obstetrician-men-NEVER-birth-child.html

(note that the article makes the mistake of calling him an OB).

I hope it went well and she’s back soon. I too think she’d have some amazing comments on this.

Yeah, Sarah if you’re out there, we’re all thinking about you.

Yep, those were my thoughts. These arguements have nothing to do with this quote. When somebody pointed that out to Dr. Rant she thought it was a completely appropriate thing to say to somebody DURING their labor.

Sorry I have actually never laughed at anyone as much as I have laughed at Amy. Yours and Heather P’s comment above have me just about wetting my pants due to the unnecessary interventions I received that caused a necessary episiotomy and now have me with pelvic floor issues…

I love your last line. “maternal care in the U.S. is not as great as it could be.” Perfect! Dr. Amy spits ans sputters about how many more women would be dead if we still did things the way they were done in 1952. But we really should be worried about how we can improve based on where we are today. More c-sections is not the answer. We have already seen that we are currently deleivering too many babies early due to scheduled c-sections and forced inductions. And the one thing the medical community has got to recognize is that c-section IS an injury to the mother. It isn’t just another method of birth. It is a guarunteed assault on the mother and should only be preformed for a reason. Previous c-section is not a reason. And it is especially not a reason to schedule. Repete c-section upon presentation of labor will prevent many prematurity complications. Even though it is inconvienient to the doctor, it is a better option for both patients’ health. That is my two cents from the woman who failed to deliver on two VBAC attempts.

Not that simple Im afraid. In Australia, if you choose a hospital, you do not get to have “midwife care”. You have a choice between care in a hospital with an obstetrician who leads a team of midwives, or now, thanks to our idiot health minister, care with a home midwife, overseen by an obstetrician who then decides if s/he will LET you birth at home.

Frickin stupid if you ask me. Why clog the tubes with healthy people?

I’ve not given birth in the US (though I’m from the US), so I can’t answer completely, but I imagine some of that has to do with being restricted by insurance as to which doctor you can see. And that there’s no guarantee your doctor would be able to attend the birth. Some hospitals aren’t designed for rooming in, which isn’t the fault of the doctor; if that’s the only hospital available for the mother, then her choice is again restricted. I don’t know how common that is, though. I agree that there are good and bad medical professionals, just as there are good & bad teachers, lawyers, etc. I like to think the good outweigh the bad in most cases.

This post happened to my friend, and I’ll tell you why. We are military wives on a very small, remote island. The options are limited, sadly. She did not feel 100% confident in a freebirth (as there are no homebirth midwives here), so that is why she ended up at the hospital. As for the dr she got (albeit just for a short while as it was shift change), that’s how it works at the Navy hospital. You see who is THERE the day you go into labor, no matter who you liked best of the many drs you saw during your pregnancy. It’s stupid, but that is how it works.
Know what I’d like to see? MORE compassion and empathy for the moms who endure horrid drs like this. I’ve been there myself, with that same dr and others, and it’s like a knife to the heart to be mocked or heartlessly questioned about it.

Amy,

Some women here have been through terrible ordeals with their births, and I believe that that is a legitimate reason for being defensive about one’s birth philosophy.

That being said, I personally didn’t find your question at all offensive, and I’d be happy to give you my answer!

I think the main reason some women end up with an OB (or midwife) that does not share their birth philosophy is because so few doctors are on call for their patients these days, at least in my area (Twin Cities, MN). I’m studying to be a doula, and I have attended a few hospital births, and for each one the OB we got was the one on call, period. One of the nurses actually made a remark, “Well, you only have a 1 in 7 shot of getting your OB, that’s the just the way it is!” So some women may find themselves unpleasantly surprised with who they end up with.

And that’s just the OB! When you factor in shift changes over the course of a long labor, the nurses, the nursery staff, one or more anesthesiologists, the lab staff, etc., a laboring mom is probably going to interact with dozens of different people during her time the hospital. And all it takes is one big jerk to mar someone’s experience. For instance, the last hospital birth I was at, we had a lot of amazing people helping us; the vast majority of them. But the first midwife on call performed a very rough internal exam without warning during a contraction, and the anesthesiologist said a number of really rude things (as well as shoving my client’s body around like a rag doll), and my client came away from the experience with some bad stories and some stuff to work through. So it’s not too surprising that there are bad stories out there. (On the other hand, a woman laboring at home is unlikely to have to deal with any strangers )

Also, I did a fair amount of research when I was pregnant, and the c-section rates (and rates for other interventions) are all over the map in Minnesota. In the Cities, it’s ok, because we can find out which hospital best fits our needs (as long as said hospital accepts our insurance). But in rural areas, there may literally be only one choice. And smaller hospitals may have restrictive policies, or a small choice of OBs. Another client wanted a VBAC, but she lives in a rural area. Only 1 of the 3 OBs at the nearby hospital would even consider a VBAC, and he had a vacation scheduled for the week of her due date. The hospital also had a very restrictive VBAC policy. Fortunately, my client went into labor naturally, during the day, at 39 weeks, so she got her VBAC! But if she’d gone into labor at night or it had been a week later, she would have had no choice but to have another c-section.

Does that answer your question? I absolutely agree with you that it’s important to ask questions, try to understand one another and treat each other with respect, and I’m glad you’re willing to stick your nose out an ask a potentially unpopular question!

-Kate

For my first, it was a lack of research. I went with the teaching hospital and the practice attached to it. I did really like MY doctor, but as someone else already pointed out, I was not guaranteed him when I delivered. I ended up with the doctor on call, who was horrid. I did not understand my rights as a patient (also lack of research), and therefore got pushed down on my back with every contraction, assaulted with very painful VEs, and eventually bullied into a cesarean.
With my second, I had no options in my town. There was one hospital, and they don’t allow VBACs. I traveled to a nearby city that had a decent midwives’ practice, and had an induced VBAC at 40wks3d.
I am now pregnant with my third, and I have recently moved to a state with a 40% cesarean rate. I have Medicaid, which limits my options severely. There is a birth-friendly hospital, but there are only two doctors who deliver there. One does not do VBACs, and the other (which comes very highly recommended) does not take medicaid. So I have found another OB (again, midwives are not an option for me since they are not covered), who will hopefully be calling me this week, since they finally were able to get my medical records. As far as I have been able to research, this practice is really my only option for a good birth experience. And you better believe I am still gearing up for a fight. After what happened the first time, I am incapable of really trusting medical professionals with my child’s birth.
I have a friend who had three sections before she finally got her vaginal birth. As I understand it, she had two options in the entire country. Dr. Cummings in Dallas and Dr. Tate in Atlanta. Her and her husband drove three hours from TN to Atlanta so she could have her vaginal birth.
Not all of us have the options you do. I am so glad to hear there is a place that is like that, though. Where do you live?

You’re kidding right? NO one here claims women don’t sometimes die in childbirth. The issue is that this mom was fearmongered while she was trying to breathe through her contractions. The dr was mean, and not remotely helpful.
Birth is as safe as life gets….in that it’s not perfect or risk free, and never will be.

I can’t speak for everyone, but some people, like myself, don’t come here just to read about peoples mistakes. I think you’re confused about why we come here. We’re here because this has happened to us, and reading that these things have happened to others helps us feel like we’re not alone. Doctors, nurses, and midwives who’ve attended our births have said or done horrible, nasty things to us, made us feel like we’re worthless, stupid, and broken. We struggle with depression and sometimes PTSD, and the family around us isn’t always supportive or helpful when dealing with these issues. We’re told to shut up and deal with it, since the baby is healthy. So we come here to share our experiences (anonymously sometimes)and feel like we aren’t all alone. That what happened to us wasn’t all right, it was wrong. That it’s okay to feel the way we feel. No one here is claiming to be perfect. None of us are. But we’ve learned since these things have happened to us. And we get angry sometimes. We get angry that this is still happening to other women. If you don’t like this site, you don’t have to visit it. A lot of us hope that this site won’t be needed anymore, that laboring and pregnant women will be treated with respect, and given evidence-based care. Until then, we’re glad we have someplace where it’s okay for us to be angry, and work through that angry, because some of us have no one else who’ll listen or help.

not sure why you wasted your breath, what with all the children you are busy raising. You seem to be the one judging here…. just sayin…

Amen.

Jesus…SERIOUSLY?! You think that before hospitals women gave birth in fields with no one but a relative who has given birth before?! No one is arguing that birth isn’t safer than it was 100 years ago – you know…before germs and necessary medical intervention.
You give nurses a bad name with such ignorance My friends who are L&D nurses are glad to be able to deliver at home with a CNM after seeing the shit that doctors pull in the hospital!

It’s much safer now than it was 100 years ago.
At the turn of the century it was one of the most common ways women would die!
Glad to be delivering a baby these days with a doc in a hospital than in a field somewhere with some female relative who kinda knows what she’s doing.

I somehow doubt that’s the way it would go…

I’ve been wondering, after reading her blog and her reaction to this blog (conspiracy theories and all), whether Dr. Tuteur is possibly on the autism spectrum? She seems to have a very difficult time empathizing with others or accepting that other’s experiences have reality, she is extremely fixated on a single topic and spends what must be an unhealthy amount of time interacting online, she is more comfortable with numbers and statistics than people or emotions, and she often says outright insensitive things when faced with women who have had difficult childbirth experiences.

I know internet armchair psycho-analysis is of limited use, but keeping this possibility in mind certainly helps me put Dr. Amy in some kind of perspective and reminds me not to rise to the bait.