Every year in America, approximately 1% of births occur at home. In Illinois in 1992, 1,218 families submitted birth certificates that reflected the birth of children. Approximately one third of the births were in black families. In Wisconsin, 591 home births were recorded in the same year, of which 22 were for black families. 1 It is likely that many other home births in Illinois did take place, but were not registered because of the discriminatory birth registration practice, which places responsibility for registering parents born in their homeland and requires a different mechanism than is used for any other births that arise.
One of the safety measures of the place of birth is infant mortality, in particular, infant mortality during the first 28 days. According to the Center for Disease Control, in 1990, 19,098 neonatal deaths were reported for babies born in hospital. For children born at home, there were 260 newborns. Infant mortality is defined as the number of deaths per 1000 live births. The mortality rate among children born in the hospital was 5.6, and for those who were born at home, it was 11.1, which apparently indicates that the hospital is the best bet on the survival of the child. However, when fertility statistics are further broken down into those who attended birth, the picture changes dramatically. Direct entry actresses had the best effects with a mortality rate of 1.9 compared with neonates born to CNM (2.9) or doctors - DO (15.1) or MD (24.7). 2
History Until 1900, the birth of children was the birthplace of most Americans. In fact, more than 90% of the living on Earth today were born at home! Hospital or institutional birth is a relatively new development that became popular in the 1920s due to the advancement of the doctor and the increased use of the car. Like today, a much greater economic effect from a doctor's time is visiting patients in one place. There is also an economic incentive, as the doctor can visit more than one patient at the same time in the hospital, while other, less important assistants can follow more mundane tasks of the birth.
Part of this shift at the place of birth should be attributed to propaganda condemning midwives that took place at the same time. Thanks to their economic and organized strength, groups of doctors were able to legally increase hospital deliveries, eliminating those who still attended home deliveries, eliminating the midwife. From 1930 to the state of 1960, after the state changed its laws, or restricted the practice of obstetrics, or completely destroyed legal practice. However, no valid study conducted or to date has proven that the planned birth of a child was less safe than a birth in a hospital.
Research
Many studies have been done in an attempt to prove that hospitals are the safest place to be born. Some of the earliest of these included all births that originated from the hospital, regardless of the age of gestation or the planned place of birth. These studies included miscarriages that occurred at home, as well as abrupt childbirth and childbirth, which were unsupervised. To be valid, the study must compare equal and change only one element. Lewis Meale did it when he picked up 2,092 women and compared their birth results. As a result, the birth of children with a trained assistant was safer than a birth in a hospital.
What does safer mean?
Most families do not want to know the statistical chances for a good exit, they want to know more precisely how home birth will grow. Many studies provide data on these criteria for listing and comparing results.
Chart is one website http://www.midwives.net
As can be seen from the graph, many complications appear to occur more frequently in the hospital. Many women are told that they need episiotomy to prevent tears, but the data from these births show that this is still not the case, since there were 9 times more tears in the hospital group! Fetal distress, often referred to as a complication requiring a cesarean section, was 6 times more common in the hospital group. 4 times the number of newborn infections, 22 times the supply of forceps, 30 times more birth injuries and 3 times the caesarean section in the hospital group.
Assessment of deaths due to preventable childbirth
The following statistics, derived from data collected between the 1940s and 1980s, represent a conservative estimate of the lives lost due to our system of treating pregnancy as a medical event requiring medical intervention and care. * About 1 000 000 babies died before or before birth, which were supposed to live * About 1600 000 babies who died before the 1st birthday, who were supposed to live *, at least 1 500 000 children were seriously injured as a result of medical procedures * at least 45,000,000 children had minimal brain damage, which was normal. Today, it is estimated that 50 newborns die unnecessarily every day, when deaths can be prevented if the "five standards of safe childbirth" were employed. It breaks into preventable child death every 29 minutes, every hour of the day, every day of the year. NAPSAC writes: "Since 1940, at least a million babies have died in American hospitals that would not live to have a doctor dominate in maternity hospitals that dictate the standards for American births."
Who should decide what is safer?
Childbirth is not a laboratory project that can be reproduced at will with consequences compared to each other. There is also no medical event, such as a planned operation, that can be timed, monitored, or forced to get the desired result. Every year, he sees, scientists discover some aspect of birth that was unknown or unverified. In addition, it would seem that the technologies that were initially perceived as a “cure” for a particular problem, as it turned out, create unacceptable side effects or increase the risks for more serious complications. Birth also has a psychological component that can put some women with incredible risk into the hospital.
A recent article in a prestigious magazine looked at the birth of a family and asked the question: “Is it safe? Is that ethical? ”The authors of physics have concluded that children have“ a certain small risk ”and that“ hospital births entail a wider range of risks ”. They also believe that, since the actual risk factors inherent in family birth are very small, perhaps 1/1000, and the consequences of making a birth decision will be borne only by parents, doctors must support parents who are willing to take this risk, therefore, to make This experience is as safe as possible. The Oxford Perinatal Project also came to this conclusion after an exhaustive look at every scientifically based research done since the aspects of caring for pregnant women and births and their babies were considered in 1950. Since science cannot prove that home birth is less safe than hospital birth, I believe that every family has the constitutional right to choose where to give birth. I believe that as long as science does not have a detrimental effect on those who prefer to give birth at home, medical personal family support in their decision. NAPSAC shares this opinion and inquiries: “Who should decide what is the best balance between medical and psychological risk?” .. It must be parents. "
Sources: 1. Center for Disease Control, Live Births at the Place of Birth and Mother's Race, 1992, Section 1, Natality, p. 246. 2. Center for Disease Control, United States, 1990 Cohort, Table 43 , pp. 2 and 5. 3. Litoff, Judy Barrett, “American Head of a Midwife,” pp. 1-10. 4. Mehl, Lewis, “Scientific research on alternatives to childbirth and what he tells about the practice of hospitals,” NAPSAC, 21st Century Obstetrics, 1978, vol. 1, pp. / 171-207. 5. Stewart, “Five Standards for Safe Childbearing,” pp. 137-138. 6. Hoff and Schneiderman: “Having children at home: is it safe? Is that so? ”,“ Hastings Center, ”December 1985, pp. 19-27. 7. Enkin, Keirse & Chalmers, A Guide to Effective Care during Pregnancy and Childbirth, Oxford University Press, New York, 1989.
NAPSAC is a non-profit and tax-free organization that can be reached on route 1, in box 646, in Marble Hill, MO 63764, at (314) 238-2010.
Some may argue that statistics does not tell the whole story, and this is true, but it is the best scientific way to reduce those who promote institutional birth as the only option for everyone, regardless of risk status.
