Without modern obstetrics, both Jessa and Jill Dugger would probably be dead


Trust birth?

You must be joking!

Jessa Duggar Seewald and Jill Duggar Dillard are two, young healthy women who planned homebirths. They were about as low risk as low risk can be, yet, in an object lesson for homebirth advocates, both had to be rescued by obstetricians.

Jill, in direct contrast to the prattling of homebirth advocates that “your body won’t grow a baby too big to birth” grew a baby too big to birth.

[pullquote align=”right” color=”#86273F”]They trusted birth and birth nearly killed them.[/pullquote]

Jessa apparently had an uncomplicated spontaneous vaginal delivery … and then began to bleed heavily, so heavily that she had to be transferred to the hospital.

What would have happened to the Duggar sisters had they lived 200 years ago instead of today?

Jill would have been one of the hundreds, perhaps thousands, of American women who died of obstructed labor each and every year.

What is obstructed labor? It’s the technical term for a baby too big or too poorly positioned to fit through the pelvis. Prior to the advent of safe cesareans Jill would have labored in agony for days, struggling to push the baby through her pelvis with no chance of success. The baby’s head would have molded and elongated, the plates of the his skull sliding over each other in a desperate effort to decrease the diameter of the his head so it could be forced through.

A uterine infection might have developed to which baby and mother would have succumbed. Alternatively, Jill’s uterus might have ruptured and they could have bled to death. If the situation became desperate, her providers might have attempted to save her life by passing instruments through the cervix and dismembering the baby.

Jessa, in contrast, might have bled to death after the successful birth of a healthy boy. Why did she bleed so much? There are a number of possible reasons:

  • Uterine atony: the uterus was simply exhausted after pushing a very large baby and simply refused to contract. Since the only way uterine bleeding can be stopped is by the uterine muscles contracting around the blood vessels and closing them off, massive bleeding will occur if the uterus fails to contract.
  • A retained remnant of placenta: The uterus can only contract completely if it is completely empty. Even a small piece that has torn away from the placenta can keep the uterus from contracting and heavy bleeding may be the result.
  • A cervical laceration: These tears in the cervix can bleed profusely and can only be stopped by clamping and stitching them. Cervical lacerations are not common but they are more likely if the mother begins to push before she is fully dilated.
  • Major vaginal lacerations: These tears can extend through the back of the vagina right through to the rectum. Although they need to be carefully repaired by an obstetrician they usually don’t bleed a great deal.
  • Jessa could have developed pre-eclampsia with HELLP syndrome. HELLP stands for hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelets. It is a life threatening condition that, in the absence of treatment, can easily result in death.

What would have happened if Jessa had give birth at the hospital? That’s hard to say since we don’t know exactly what had happened. Uterine atony could be treated with a variety of medications. A piece of retained placenta could have been removed immediately. A cervical laceration or vaginal lacerations could have been repaired immediately. All of these things would have reduced or prevented heavy blood loss.

Instead, Jessa lost so much blood that she had to be admitted to the hospital, probably for blood transfusions at the least. The fact that she remains in the hospital suggests that there was a bigger problem than blood loss or lacerations alone.

Ironically, Jessa gave birth at home almost certainly so she could spend the first hour skin to skin and breastfeeding her newborn. Instead, she probably wasn’t even in the same zip code.

It’s hard not to feel sorry for Jessa. She was probably contractually bound to news outlets to provide pictures of the baby, but she wasn’t there to be in them. She was probably contractually bound to provide a family photo as soon as possible so her husband brought the baby to the hospital and it appears that they hung a sheet behind her hospital bed; she was probably sitting in the bed (too weak to stand?) and husband was standing beside her.

She’s given birth, she’s suffered a serious complication and she’s required to be on display in order to earn money. So much for the intimacy of homebirth.

So both Jill and Jessa trusted birth and birth nearly killed them. Obstetricians, in contrast, saved them. They’ve given us an object lesson in why homebirth can be dangerous and even deadly.

Thinking about homebirth? Think about Jessa and Jill and think again.

415 Responses to “Without modern obstetrics, both Jessa and Jill Dugger would probably be dead”

  1. Stacy48918
    November 16, 2015 at 10:12 pm #

    The Duggars are a cult. Period. I hope at least one of their children manages to get out to the real world, get a real education and lead a real life.

    Now that that’s said, a short off-topic rant. (apologies to everyone else) I’m putting this here in case an interested party is still Googling my screenname. I don’t know who you are but you’re no friend of mine. You’re a liar, a snake, a hypocrite and an all-around horrible person. Please let me know who you are because I’m not afraid to tell you these things in person. But you’re too cowardly for that. So take a screenshot and report back about all the “meen” things I said. Or maybe just stop stalking me. Have a great day! 😀

    • Chi
      November 22, 2015 at 8:44 pm #

      Someone’s googling your SN? And they say that WE’RE the ones who need lives *eye roll*

      • November 22, 2015 at 8:45 pm #

        She’s been stalked by an ex. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

        • Chi
          November 22, 2015 at 8:47 pm #

          Yikes. I honestly thought it was one of the ravening natural birth crowd, because I have seen some pretty stalkerish behaviour from some of them, so hearing that one of them is doing something like that is not a total surprise.

          Stay safe hun.

          • November 22, 2015 at 9:57 pm #

            Eh, you didn’t know. Now you do. 🙂

        • Stacy48918
          November 22, 2015 at 9:17 pm #

          Present tense – “still being stalked”, apparently.

      • Stacy48918
        November 22, 2015 at 8:50 pm #

        Yup. Several of my SOB posts have actually been submitted as evidence in divorce court of how “meen” I am. Ridiculous. Apparently my ex is using “friends” and family to find things I post here and on FB. None of them is brave enough to tell me to my face, they just sneak around like backstabbing cowards. Screenshot that. ;-). I’m just fed up and wanted to post something directly “to” them since they won’t actually tell me who they are.

        Yes, we are all Trolls With Wooden Spoons here. Lol.

        • Chi
          November 22, 2015 at 8:52 pm #

          Oh wow. That is so uncool. And childish.

          If I were one of those so-called ‘friends’ I’d feel pretty damn ashamed of myself, because you just don’t DO things like that.


          *hugs* I hope it all works out okay. Thinking good thoughts for you.

        • Who?
          November 22, 2015 at 9:04 pm #

          So sorry. Says a lot about the people you are leaving behind.

          I can’t imagine the judge giving that kind of behaviour the time of day, though it is very upsetting and very wrong of whoever is doing it to be ‘brave’ enough to stalk you but not be prepared to tell you themselves they are doing it.

          Glad you’re safe and hope you’re finding better friends.

          • Stacy48918
            November 22, 2015 at 9:18 pm #

            “Says a lot about the people you are leaving behind.”
            Yes, it does.

  2. Ash
    November 12, 2015 at 12:25 am #

    People magazine confirmed that Jessa Duggar required emergency transport to the hospital for postpartum hemorrhage and received a blood transfusion.

  3. Dea
    November 11, 2015 at 7:32 pm #

    I live in Brazil, our hospitals (specially from private health system) are the champions of unnecessary/money related/convenient c-sections, so yeah, I understand from where all the hate and the “trust birth” come from. My mother was nearly killed by a uterine rupture after an unnecessary c-section. Sometimes, natural is better. That being said, I couldn’t agree more with this text! Dr.Amy Tuteur nailed it again. Natural is NOT ALWAYS better and we shouldn’t blindly trust birth! As doctor Amy said in one of her older posts, homebirth is like driving without a seatbelt: it doesn’t necessarily mean that something will go wrong, but if something goes wrong, you have high chances of facing serious complications and even death! So unless you are a poor woman with no access to a hospital at all, having a homebirth is like attempting to be a part of the tragic statistics. I fear the dangers of this “empowering” and feminist homebirth mentality as much as I fear the dangers of unnecessary c-sections. Just a few days ago, I heard about a brazilian mother whose baby died at a breech homebirth (her doctor assured her that breech birth complications were a “tabu”). This doctor is now (finally) being sued, and it’s not the first time that one of her homebirths goes wrong. As for Jessa and Jill, I feel sorry for them… they really seem to be two genuinely good and well intentioned people, but the fact that their parents educated them so strictly does not help! The only birth knowledges that they have come from: 1- their radical crazy mother (who does not show any emotions while giving birth). 2- their innocent sister-in-law who was blessed to have had 4 succesfull and relatively easy natural births experiences. 3- Jill’s knowledges as a midwife (she was probably tough by other midwives, so I’m not impressed with the fact that she doesn’t give much attention to homebirth risks). 4- the homebirth mentality where they live. It seems to me that many americans see homebirth as a normal thing (perhaps the result of many years of brainwashing and misinformation by birth activists?). Here in Brazil homebirth is not yet a big part of our culture, but thanks to our pro-homebirth feminist activists the things here are starting to change (I fear for it too). I’m not surprised AT ALL to read Jessa saying that labor was something different from what she expected. Poor girl! Somebody should have told her that labor is hard work, she should have been better prepared for it, and she should have done it at the hospital! Well, now that she had this difficult birth experience, I wonder if she will choose a homebirth again. I hope she changes her mind!

    • PennieP
      November 16, 2015 at 11:00 am #

      I don’t know how familiar you are with this girl Jessa and her wacky family. She is a brat and a know-it-all. No one is smarter than this uneducated ( home schooled by her mother who has a H S diploma) she stops at 16. I don’t think she had medical clearance from a professional or had a midwife attending the birth. I could go on and on but it’s upsetting and infuriating.

    • Hoter
      November 22, 2015 at 6:08 pm #

      I had all my kids at home with no complications. Even though we planned this, if I got into difficulty, would have been grateful for the option for intervention. Hospital can be fucking dangerous, so can home birth. Lots of appeals to emotion here that are not really that helpful.

      • swbarnes2
        November 22, 2015 at 6:35 pm #

        Hence the clinical literature which is cited here often, which shows that home birth is more dangerous than hospital birth. There are too many situations where having hospital equipment 5 minutes away means the difference between a healthy baby that just skirted harm, and a seriously damaged baby and/or mom.

      • The Bofa on the Sofa
        November 24, 2015 at 2:18 pm #

        Hospital can be fucking dangerous, so can home birth.

        And did you know that if your car catches on fire, then having a seatbelt on can be dangerous.

        Do you wear your seltbelt when you drive?

        Although I’d like to hear your support for the claim that “hospitals can be fucking dangerous.” Maybe three examples….I’ll give you one: there was that doctor in Texas who killed a baby because he tried to use forceps when he should have done a c-section instead.

        Your turn. How are hospitals dangerous?

      • The Vitaphone Queen
        March 10, 2018 at 2:15 am #

        How do you pronounce that username, man? Does it rhyme with motor? Or hotter?

        Maybe it’s “Ho-TAIR”…

  4. Allie P
    November 11, 2015 at 9:51 am #

    i had a planned induction with epidural at the hospital and i spent the first hour skin to skin and breastfeeding my filthy newborn. that’s how it’s done these days. Why do the NCB folks keep insisting hospitals are these horrible places that won’t let them see their kids?

    • Montserrat Blanco
      November 11, 2015 at 4:57 pm #

      I had a CS with a preemie. A 28 week preemie. A 28 week preemie that needed resuscitation. And they showed him to me before getting him to the NICU (he was already breathing on his own).

      • Elizabeth A
        November 22, 2015 at 9:44 pm #

        After my daughter was born, I had a quick hello with her before she went to the NICU, and then I was stranded in recovery for ages waiting for the morphine to wear off. Before they took me to my hospital room, the nurses wheeled my gurney to the NICU so that I could see my daughter before I slept.

        The hospital seemed pretty dedicated to making sure I saw my baby.

  5. Marie
    November 11, 2015 at 12:29 am #

    Kind of OT vent: I’m having a scheduled c-section next week at 39 weeks due to the fact that I’m carrying a large baby that may not fit into my small pelvis (thanks to borderline GD and genetics). I have an NCBer on my back with “tips” on how do to this naturally instead (such as: have sex, take a walk, smell some lavender, get a pedicure, I kid you not). She seems to think I am just trying to make things convenient for myself instead of actually trying my best to deliver a healthy baby. It has also been suggested that my doctor is trying to bully me into a c-section and that I need to see a midwife for better care. Seriously wtf.

    After multiple early losses I’m not about to risk my baby’s life for a fairy tale unicorn tears birth.

    • Who?
      November 11, 2015 at 12:42 am #

      I’m sorry-though can I say all those activities sound really nice, absent the nonsense she’s draping them in. Why is it in NCB world nice things can’t just be enjoyed, there always has to be a reason? It’s like they think women shouldn’t just have pleasure.

      Never argue with an idiot. If you really can’t block her, which would be entirely appropriate if you wanted to, maybe nod occasionally while saying ‘how interesting’ with your eye out the window/fixed in the middle distance, until she stops talking?

      Good luck with the baby.

    • Anna
      November 11, 2015 at 1:42 am #

      OMG! What is the pedicure going to fix? Although I do remember being advised to go shopping or on a picnic in similar situation when I was heading for CS anyway (didn’t mention it though, wanted to spare my nerves in the last weeks of pregnancy). WTF? NCB is a perfect platform for people who like to patronize others and always know better. Just ignore her.

      • Who?
        November 11, 2015 at 2:12 am #

        I think a pedicure is a great idea-an extra special treat for when Marie can see her feet again!

    • Montserrat Blanco
      November 11, 2015 at 1:48 am #

      Have a pedicure! Go to the hairdresser! You will not have time in two weeks,I promise.

      Try to forget about those people. I had a CS myself and it was OK. Do enjoy your baby. I wish you a healthy baby (I am sure you will have a healthy baby) and a nice recovery from the CS. And do not carry weights for two-three months, I definetely could not, I could run three weeks later though.

    • Allie P
      November 11, 2015 at 9:52 am #

      definitely do al those things. they sound lovely. then have your CS.

    • The Bofa on the Sofa
      November 11, 2015 at 4:15 pm #

      I agree with the “have sex” advice.

      Not to avoid the CS, but because you probably won’t be able to do that for a while again (even with a c-section)

    • Roadstergal
      November 11, 2015 at 4:55 pm #

      “She seems to think I am just trying to make things convenient for myself”

      And even if you were (with your comments about early losses – man, I’m so sorry, and I admire you for going ahead with the best plan you can for your baby), _if_ you were, so what? How is a more convenient option for the mom, particularly one that’s perfectly healthy for the baby, not a good thing? Parenthood is very difficult, any little bit of convenience will help you have the resources to do it better.

      And deep down, I think she knows it. She’s giving you ‘natural’ suggestions on how to speed up the process, so she’s not opposed to the idea. You just have a more effective and safer way of going about it.

      (There’s a place down the street that does these wonderful pedicures that have calf rubs with lavender lotion and warm stones. Oh, it’s heavenly, and I bet it would be a great pre-C/S treat.)

    • yentavegan
      November 11, 2015 at 5:58 pm #

      I had a planned c/sec for my 9 pound 15 ounce baby. IT was a wonderful life affirming experience. And I got a gorgeous round headed baby , an intact perenium and a really cool scar. Planned c/sec’s are a win-win!

  6. D/
    November 10, 2015 at 5:00 pm #

    Related 120+year old conversation:

    Issues with an “Inferior Order of Midwifery Practioners”

  7. Eva
    November 10, 2015 at 12:00 pm #

    Are opinions other than yours allowed? You’re a quack. I would never trust my body or the birth of my baby to someone so opinionated and who would use the birth of two healthy babies to froward their own agenda. Jill Dillard and Jessa Seewald delivered healthy infants with no help from you. They’ve never maligned you or talked about you, yet use have no problem publicly disparaging them. Shame on you.

    • Barney Hall
      November 10, 2015 at 12:50 pm #

      Dr. Tuteur’s opinions are well grounded in a wealth of education and experience. She did not “publicly disparage” anyone; she merely explained the folly of taking ridiculous avoidable risks risks with the health and life of any mother and baby. I think her points about Jessa Seewald’s contractual obligations and separation from her newborn are very well taken.

    • Roadstergal
      November 10, 2015 at 1:34 pm #

      “Jill Dillard and Jessa Seewald delivered healthy infants with no help from you”

      They needed help from an OB with similar training and certification to DrT. A CPM at home wasn’t enough. That’s the point.

    • yugaya
      November 10, 2015 at 2:27 pm #

      “opinions… You’re a quack.”

      Actually she is a doctor, an obstetrician, so her opinions on birth are relevant and within her field of expertise.

    • Chi
      November 10, 2015 at 3:41 pm #

      Dr T is highly qualified because as an OB, she no doubt saw her fair share of emergency home birth transfers and subsequently, babies who died who might have been spared had they been in the hospital setting right from the start.

      She is using these two well-known women to prove the point that home birth is inherently dangerous EVEN FOR THOSE CONSIDERED LOW RISK. The Duggars should have been low risk, but they BOTH wound up transferring.

      And Jessa could have DIED while being transported to hospital because when a mother is bleeding THAT badly time is of the essence. Jill’s baby was born by c-section so that completely defeated the purpose of having a home birth, didn’t it?

      But of course the babies are healthy so that’s all that matters isn’t it? But what about the health of the mothers? Jill got a c-section so she’s likely to be fine, but Jessa will probably take a bit longer to recover and possibly need surgery if it was a retained piece of placenta.

      So no, Dr T was not ‘disparaging’ them. Because that would imply that Dr T does not think they’re worth anything. And Dr T thinks all mothers and babies are worth something. They’re worth being encouraged to give birth SAFELY and with the health and well-being of their baby in mind.

      These women were lucky. They and their babies were able to be saved and seem to have come through it okay. Many babies and some mothers do not. And THAT is why Dr T writes this blog.

    • The Computer Ate My Nym
      November 11, 2015 at 3:27 am #

      There are times when I feel that Dr. Tuteur has been skirted with what is acceptable in terms of presenting semi-private information.This isn’t one of them. The Duggars decided, for their own profit, to make their lives and these births public. They are public figures. They make their money by allowing people to see how they live. If they can’t accept that they’ll be criticized for their idiotic decisions, then they should get real jobs, if they’re qualified for any.

  8. The Computer Ate My Nym
    November 10, 2015 at 9:29 am #

    Kind of semi-off topic, but for next time someone comes in whining about “defensive medicine”: http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h5516-0.long

    • Megan
      November 10, 2015 at 9:45 am #

      I saw this. I noticed the authors were careful to comment to Journal Watch that we should not use this to justify defensive medicine but it really does confirm what most docs have been saying for years. I think the adage is: “You never get sued for the test you did, only the one you didn’t do.”

      • The Computer Ate My Nym
        November 10, 2015 at 9:47 am #

        If one assumes that the most common reason for malpractice claims is malpractice, then it also implies that spending more and running more tests is better medicine.

  9. Bombshellrisa
    November 9, 2015 at 6:06 pm #

    OT: a rant. My friend texts me this morning and says she is being “hounded” by the school district because she will not give her son a Dtap booster. He attends a program where parents go with their kids to school and they get assignments and do some classes and then they are home the rest of the time. There are a good number of kids in that program who are there because they are very sick and can’t do traditional schooling. When I mentioned that these kids are relying on herd immunity, she said “well what about when they go to the store or out?” She completely missed the point. She said that she is so well researched, is “too smart for her own good” and said she has watched all the documentaries and so she is against vaccination and also understands that the Gates foundation is some part of a conspiracy involving birth control. I am still a little worn out making the same old arguments since shooting fish in a barrel with Abby and just tired of people who believe that watching a documentary is doing research. I hope her kid does end up getting the Dtap. (This is the same friend who mixes garlic, ginger, lemon and pineapple and thinks its as effective as the flu shot in preventing influenza)

    • Who?
      November 9, 2015 at 6:07 pm #

      She needs to find a different program for her son, if she’s that committed to this particular form of neglect.

      • Bombshellrisa
        November 9, 2015 at 6:22 pm #

        She does. I love her to pieces, but our relationship has deteriorated because of her stance on vaccination. Oddly enough, she is completely against home birth (“it could never be safe! There are no antibiotics! What if you want pain meds? Your baby could die if you aren’t tested for GBS! What if you have a tear?) yet is perfectly ok with no vaccines.

        • Who?
          November 9, 2015 at 6:25 pm #

          I’m sorry, that’s hard, especially when your kids are an age where this comes up.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 9, 2015 at 6:31 pm #

            It’s hard. She doesn’t understand why I don’t want her daughter to babysit, my other friends are pro vaccine and I ask for their help because I feel my son is safer with them and their kids. Hurt feelings, as you can imagine.

          • Who?
            November 9, 2015 at 6:36 pm #

            Wow that is really difficult.

            Perhaps she wants the validation, or thinks if you give in on this it might lead to you seeing the light on vaccination.

            Parenting really does throw up surprising challenges, that’s for sure.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 9, 2015 at 9:14 pm #

            You only want vaccinated people to babysit? Cus you are afraid that they are the carriers of the disease?

          • Mishimoo
            November 9, 2015 at 9:47 pm #

            Or because antivaxxers seem to be less likely to seek proper medical care than provaxxers. I know who I’d rather leave my kids with.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 1:08 am #

            I have not known that to be the case. All of the people I know who have concerns about various vaccinations (like for instance, even some who only take issue with giving it to people younger than toddlers, those with a compromised blood-brain barrier, or giving too many at one time), are the type of care intensely about the physical well-being of their children.

            And, as such, they make sure their kids have healthy diets, vitamin D, stay safe, get medical attention whenever needed, and even if there is a concern that it might be needed.

            But, none of that counts? Vax or nothing?

          • Amazed
            November 10, 2015 at 1:15 am #

            Vax AND everything else.

            When you and your entitled fellow thinkers are going to realize that healthy diet is no fucking protection against diseases that have killed tens of thousands?

            Never, I guess. There will always be those fools who will take the tiny risk of vaccinating, so you all can defend your idiotic theories with no more knowledge than you have about the rate of c-sections. Charming.

            Look, when you want to homebirth, it’s your business alone. It’s fine with me, as long as you’re informed. It’s you and yours on the line, chances are good that you’ll be lucky and if not, it was your choice anyway. But I draw the line when it comes to vaccines. You ride freely on the shoulders of those who do their duty to society and you DARE come here and proselytize, playing the victim? And putting OTHER people at risk?

            You’re disgusting.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 1:44 am #

            You are a very aggressive person. Might want to think about tolerance sometime.

            If you spend all your time worrying about physical health, and none of your time worrying about emotional or relational health, you aren’t going to find a very fulfilling life.

            Looking at facts, though, you cleverly ignore the suffering of all the parents whose infants have died from vaccines. It’s either that or being a “disgusting” person to you. And putting others at risk? If you vaccinate, then you aren’t at risk from those who don’t, if the vaccines do their job and protect you. Saying that your vaccination won’t work unless no one exposes you to the illnesses is basically you saying that vaccinations don’t work.

            Healthy diet was not on the topic of vaccination, it was part of a list of actions that parents who care about the well being of their child takes. It included medical attention, for instance. It was counter the claim that those who any concerns about the risks of vaccination (including infant death) must not pursue other medical attention when needed.

            And calling people “fools” “idiotic” “entitled” “disgusting” and so forth is not an intellectual argument. Logically, it’s a ad hominem attack. It is ineffective at persuading people. The only thing it does it showcase your own personal need to shame and vilify other people, rather than caring or showing tolerance to your fellow man.

          • Amazed
            November 10, 2015 at 2:29 am #

            Yeah, telling the truth in blatant terms – aggressive person. Lying about c-sections, lying about interventions, lying about homebirth risks compared to hospital risks, freeloading on other people’s willingness to do their duty to society – tolerance to your fellow man.

            You were under the impression that I wanted to persuade you? No. Other people here have tried, very nicely. Unsuccessfully.

          • Nick Sanders
            November 10, 2015 at 2:37 am #

            Looking at facts, though, you cleverly ignore the suffering of all the parents whose infants have died from vaccines.

            Or we acknowledge that such events are sad, but a minuscule fraction of the number of children who have died of vaccine preventable diseases. On top of that, there’s all the nonfatal but major injuries: deafness and brain damage from measles, paralysis and deformity from polio, a truly horrific variety of birth defects from rubella, this list goes on and on.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 11:13 am #

            Pain and brittle bones and a plethora of other complications in post polio syndrome.

          • Roadstergal
            November 10, 2015 at 11:36 am #

            SSPE as a complication of measles, which is invariably fatal. The compromised immune systems and accompanying opportunistic infections from a measles infection.

          • Hoter
            November 12, 2015 at 10:48 am #

            This appeal to emotion is disproportionate. You cannot compare mortality in the third world with that of modern developed nations Nick, you cannot transplant stats to support a fallacy.

          • Nick Sanders
            November 12, 2015 at 11:13 am #

            Who was talking about the third world? I wasn’t.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 14, 2015 at 12:12 pm #

            You didn’t even appeal to emotion, you just listed the side effects!

          • Sarah
            November 10, 2015 at 6:53 am #

            Getting ill from a VPD is soooo good for your emotional health!

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 11:12 am #

            And for your later relationship with your parents. I know my parents weren’t awesome at a lot of things, but they would never let me get so sick I was coughing so hard I turned blue and vomited.

          • The Computer Ate My Nym
            November 10, 2015 at 9:16 am #

            Getting medical attention for your child making sure that they don’t suffer from diseases which can range in seriousness from inconvenient to life threatening and can be easily prevented with a safe and simple procedure. In short, getting them vaccinated.

            You are correct that vaccines, like everything else in life, have risks. The greatest risk involved in vaccination is getting into the car to drive to the doctor’s office to get the vaccine, but there are extremely rarely adverse effects to vaccination. If a particular child is at increased risk of an adverse event, even if that risk is still very small in absolute terms, the doctor may recommend not vaccinating them with that specific vaccine. This is why it is critically important for all those who can be vaccinated to be vaccinated: Not only does it drastically reduce the risk of them getting the illness in question, it reduces the risk of their transmitting the same to someone who cannot be vaccinated.

          • moto_librarian
            November 10, 2015 at 5:28 pm #

            I want to see proof of all of these children that died from vaccines. True vaccine reactions are exceedingly rare.

          • Who?
            November 10, 2015 at 1:28 am #

            So healthy diet, stay safe, seek medical attention is what only anti-vaxers do?

            Can you hear yourself?

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 1:34 am #

            I can hear myself, yes. I wonder if you can, though, since I never said “only.” Of course many parents who vaccinate also take those same steps.

            I was countering the idea that “anti-vax” people do not seek proper medical care in general. Such a statement goes against what I have observed.

          • Who?
            November 10, 2015 at 1:37 am #

            Real about Ms Dexter-the exact opposite of your experience.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 1:49 am #

            I would say that Ms Dexter takes an ineffective and unhealthy position, avoiding helpful and necessary medical help. I am glad that the people I myself know are more careful and do things differently that are condusive to safety.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 1:56 am #

            But she is considers an authority and she is in a position to influence people, being a practicing ND and teaching aspiring ones.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 2:04 am #

            Okay. I wouldn’t know who considers her an authority, though. Never even heard of her myself before tonight. I would hope that all people do their own research rather than just selecting someone and listening to them as the voice of authority.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 2:18 am #

            That is the problem with believing that doing your own research is a good solution. At some point, you will be in over your head. I am sure Heather Dexter feels that she is very well researched and I would believe that she has read a great deal about vitamins, tuning forks, homeopathic remedies and herbs. The problem is that reading a lot doesn’t mean what you are reading is accurate or that you possess the critical thinking skills to evaluate how what you are reading applies, it at all, to your situation.

          • Who?
            November 10, 2015 at 3:54 am #

            Exactly. Whenever I hear someone has ‘done their research’ my eyes glaze over. Whether it’s holidays (determined to wring every second out of it); work stuff (determined to get the best deal for themselves); homebirth (determined to have a positive experience) or vax (determined to not choose a risk when they can just ride on everyone else’s coattails) it is a sure sign of monumental selfishness.

            No one ever ‘does their research’ for any selfless reason.

            Add to that the control freakery that always accompanies it, and don’t they make delightful humans.

          • yugaya
            November 10, 2015 at 4:04 am #

            ” I wouldn’t know who considers her an authority, though.”

            She lectures as a faculty member on how to spread the antivaxx bullshit. That’s kinda quack authority, wouldn’t you say?

            Personally, I’m still recovering here from a bout of uncontrollable laughter after reading that she teaches a course called “Glandural Symphony”.



          • Who?
            November 10, 2015 at 1:38 am #

            So why mention them as special if ‘everyone’ does them?

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 1:47 am #

            Not everyone does it. Some people do, some don’t. But everyone I know who is concerned about vaccinations are in the group of those who do.

            Why mention it? Because I was replying to the poster who suggested that anti bad people do Not seek medical attention for their kids or others kids when appropriate.

          • yugaya
            November 10, 2015 at 3:42 am #

            You obviously missed the whole Heather Dexter fiasco case-and-point of who anti-vax people are and what they do.

            Here, let me help you: http://www.skepticalob.com/2015/11/suffer-the-unvaccinated-little-children.html

          • Nick Sanders
            November 10, 2015 at 2:32 am #

            Caring intensely is not the same thing as behaving wisely or treating effectively.

          • Hoter
            November 12, 2015 at 10:49 am #

            We know, ask any doctor who is treating a child with eczema using nothing but steroid creams and immune suppressants.

          • Mishimoo
            November 10, 2015 at 5:24 am #

            Definitely vax or nothing, because everything you raised is either proven to not be a thing or proven not to work.

            As for antivaxxers providing adequate care: they don’t. If they did, they would vaccinate their kids. They would take their kid to the doctor with a bleeding head injury and symptoms of concussion, they would take their allergic children to the doctors for bee stings instead of waiting it out, and they would definitely seek proper treatment for whooping cough.

          • Linden
            November 10, 2015 at 6:33 am #

            A family I knew cared intensely about their child, so much so, they wouldn’t have plastic toys in the house.
            Yet they nearly had a crash on the motorway doing 20 miles over the speed limit. They gave their son amber teething beads that are an obvious choking hazard. They failed to secure furniture which lead to a trip to A&E.
            These are thoughtless things to do, that compromise a child’s safety. But it is hard to think of everything, or not have a momentary lapse.
            Anti-vaxxers, on the other hand, deliberately cultivate their ignorance of diseases (witness the troll in the other thread, completely clueless on one of the deadliest childhood illnesses). Their inflated egos lead them to believe they understand research and know better than the experts. They do no care about other people, ill people, small babies.
            So yes, vax or nothing. If you are antivaxx, you are a fool, or selfish, but definitely ignorant.

          • Tiffany Aching
            November 10, 2015 at 1:53 pm #

            Will you enlighten us at any time about this blood brain barrier thing ?

          • D/
            November 10, 2015 at 3:41 pm #

            It’s pretty easy to understand actually. Little bitty baby brains are in Vegibags (to prevent sliminess, I think) and older brains are in Ziplocs. Unless you’ve been vaccinated, of course, then it’s just a recycled, off-brand, fold-top baggie. 😉

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 9, 2015 at 10:14 pm #

            Absolutely want only vaccinated people caring for my baby boy. The flu, chicken pox, measles and pertussis would be painful for him and making him suffer when he didn’t have to would be cruel. The friend in question refuses to go to a doctor for treatment even when she has recently traveled to places with high rates of measles and whooping cough, so she might be carrying something but refuses to be responsible for finding out if she is inadvertently exposing others to disease. That illness she and her kids have has persisted despite all her natural remedies.
            I do know vaccinated kids who have gotten pertussis. Their moms were smart enough to get them prompt medical attention and make sure they were quarantined.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 1:06 am #

            Well, anyone who refuses to see doctors after persisting illness, etc, does seem like they are making less safe choices.

            But, first off, shouldn’t vaccines protect your kid against those other things? Isn’t that the whole point?

            But second, there are babies who have died from vaccines, given to them like 6 at a time, during a time when their blood-brain barrier is compromised, and their baby is so tiny it can’t fight it all off.

            Yet, parents who do the research about it and decide not to expose their infant to the possibility of unnecessary death, that means that they neglect medical needs in general?

            I have not seen that. I have seen parents who take their kids to the doctor at any sign of possible issue, and also have concerns about some vaccination combinations.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 1:29 am #

            I haven’t seen six vaccinations given at one time.
            Real research doesn’t mean you have watched documentaries, googled something, read a blog by a layperson, gone to a presentation about vaccines given by a layperson or talked about vaccinations on a forum. It also doesn’t include reading inserts. I have done all those things, although it was while I was catching babies as a student midwife so I am slightly out of the loop. I was no more researched or educated for having done all that.
            Should you believe that parents who don’t vaccinate will actually jump to attention and seek medical assistance for things like whooping cough, Heather Dexter’s example is hardly an anomaly.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 1:57 am #

            If you don’t know of six being given at one time, I would challenge you yourself to do more research. The effective type. Not just reading those inserts and stuff, like you mention. I agree that “a little information is a dangerous thing.” A little meaning, enough that you feel like you can make an informed decision, but not so much that you actually know the other side of the story, the ins and outs, and the risks involved.

            All I spoke to was the fact that the people I known or have run into, who don’t do the normal vaccination procedure (often getting vaccines fewer at a time, or when the blood-brain barrier is not compromised, etc), out of concern for the health of their kid, are people who DO also take care of their children’s health in many practical ways.

            I’m not even saying that this generalizes to all anti vaccine people. I don’t know them all. But it does tear down the argument that anti vaccine people are the type who don’t seek medical attention when appropriate.

            I hope that not all pro-vaccination folks are as judgmental and pro-ostracising as a bunch on this forum.

          • Amazed
            November 10, 2015 at 2:05 am #

            Tsk, tsk. We don’t want disease vectors like you and your fellow thinkers running around and ruining the life of those too young to be vaccinated, those immunocompromised and those for whom the vaccine won’t take. The evil people we are! Spoiling your little freeloading party. I am so ashamed.

            ETA: Bomb is actually in the medical field. She knows about vaccines, and not by reading inserts and listening to laypeople and anecdotes. Unlike you.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 2:13 am #

            I don’t need to research anything, I get regular refreshers at work and have listened to grand rounds dealing with the subject. If there are legitimate concerns about how your child reacts, your doctor or ARNP will work out a schedule. I have never seen my kids get more than three shots at a time. I do have a friend whose sons had seizures after getting vaccines, so she takes the boys in frequently to get just one shot at a time (doctor’s suggestion, not hers).

          • Nick Sanders
            November 10, 2015 at 2:30 am #


          • Chi
            November 10, 2015 at 4:23 am #

            Except there is NO CREDIBLE peer-reviewed research that shows spacing out the vaccines has ANY effect in reducing the risk of an adverse reaction. In fact, research suggests that as well as leaving them at risk of disease LONGER they’re more likely to have an adverse reaction the longer it’s put off.


            That is an article about the guy who basically made up an ‘alternate’ vaccine schedule and how he HIMSELF admits that it’s basically a load of shit he threw together to MAKE MONEY.

            His main source of income are wealthy, privileged anti-vax families.

            Also, what research? My 18 month old daughter has NEVER received more than 3 vaccines at any given visit. (Oh and by the way, counting the DTaP as 3 vaccines is poor math). I sincerely doubt any pediatrician would give that many at once, since if they’re catching up, there would still need to be a reasonable amount of time between boosters.

            Lastly, anecdotes are NOT data. Please link to conclusive research from credible sources. I personally have never heard from anywhere credible about a child dying from vaccination. Because I’m pretty damn sure that if it happened, it would make news.

          • Bugsy
            November 10, 2015 at 11:28 am #

            Ditto for my 3-year-old – never more than 3 vaccines in one sitting, even for his earliest rounds of shots.

          • Montserrat Blanco
            November 10, 2015 at 10:43 am #

            Explain to me a little bit better the research regarding the blood-brain barrier…

            A few published papers in peer reviewed journals involving studies performed of pathology analysis in dead babies would be fine.

          • PrimaryCareDoc
            November 10, 2015 at 10:46 am #

            I agree. I’m very curious about this compromised blood-brain barrier that Skarlet seems to be such an expert in.

          • Rachele Willoughby
            November 10, 2015 at 11:06 pm #

            Journals and package inserts don’t tell the whole story. Weren’t you listening? In order to be *really* informed you have to delve deep into the blogs! Only sheep believe in science.

          • moto_librarian
            November 10, 2015 at 5:26 pm #

            I can think of one occasion when four were given, but that’s only because DTaP is three vaccines in one. That plus rotavirus is technically four.

          • SporkParade
            November 10, 2015 at 4:22 am #

            Mine has had 7 at one time. In Israel, there’s a shot that contains 5 vaccines (Tdap+Hib+IPV). At 2 and 4 months, it’s given together with rota and PCV. At 6 months, it’s given together with rota and the third round of Hep B.

            Doesn’t change the fact that people who delay or don’t vaccinate are loons who hate their own children.

          • Wren
            November 10, 2015 at 5:24 am #

            No, that’s three shots at once, with far fewer antigens than the child is exposed to in day to day life.

            You do understand that outside of vaccines a person is not exposed to a single disease at a time but to plenty at once, right? If the immune system could handle only one at a time, we would all be dead.

          • SporkParade
            November 10, 2015 at 5:57 am #

            No, that’s two shots and one set of drops. And, yes, I understand that. That’s why I included people who delay vaccines in the category of “loons who hate their own children.”

          • Wren
            November 10, 2015 at 6:28 am #

            Oh, you’re right. Just 2 shots.

          • yugaya
            November 10, 2015 at 3:34 am #

            You forgot to mention list of vaccine ingredients.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 11:06 am #

            With all the paranoia about vaccines, why would anyone trust the ingredients listed to be correct? Seriously, it’s a conspiracy but the label and insert are telling the truth?

          • Tiffany Aching
            November 10, 2015 at 1:49 pm #

            I’ve never understood the incoherence between “big pharma is lying to us about vaccines !” and “just read the insert, it’s all there !”. Doesn’t make any sense.

          • PeggySue
            November 10, 2015 at 3:59 am #

            What’s this blood-brain barrier compromise thing?

          • Who?
            November 10, 2015 at 4:00 am #

            It’s not a thing, just another anti-vax trope…the homebirth anti-vax woo is strong with this one.

          • Chi
            November 10, 2015 at 4:13 am #

            From what I’ve read (and I’m NOT a doctor, just a curious parent cos I hear the term come up a LOT in anti-vax arguments), the blood-brain barrier is like a layer of cells that separate the fluid surrounding the brain from the circulating blood in the central nervous system. It’s permeable though so allows some gases, water and other stuff through.

            Apparently some areas of the brain do not have this barrier.

            But one of the most common arguments in the anti-vax trope toolbox is that ‘heavy metals’ from vaccines (of which there are NONE) cross this barrier and cause damage to the brain, which is WHY vaccines cause autism/asthma/eczema/allergies/insert vaccine ‘injury’ of choice here.

            It’s absolute BS because a) there ARE no heavy metals in vaccines and b) the other ‘toxic’ ingredients aren’t present in a high enough dosage to be of any concern. It’s a classic way they try to make themselves look educated and sciency when they really have NO idea what they’re talking about.

          • moto_librarian
            November 10, 2015 at 5:25 pm #

            You know what does cross the blood-brain barrier? Meningitis.

          • Chi
            November 10, 2015 at 5:28 pm #

            Yeah and we have a vaccine for several of the things known to cause it. Like Hib.

          • Charybdis
            November 10, 2015 at 5:53 pm #

            Even IF there were heavy metals in vaccines (which there AREN’T), c’mon folks!! DUH! They are HEAVY metals, which means they will fall to the bottom of the syringe or to the bottom of the baby. ‘Cause they’re HEAVY and can’t stay in solution. Maybe that’s where the phrase “get the lead out” comes from.


          • Chi
            November 10, 2015 at 6:07 pm #

            I adore you 🙂

          • Charybdis
            November 10, 2015 at 8:06 pm #

            *kicks ground* Aww, thank you. I needed to hear that today.

          • Sue
            November 20, 2015 at 12:20 am #

            Yet another bit of pseudoscience.

            It’s true that the blood-brain barrier is not fully developed in newborns, but that’s not an issue for the newborn vax schedule.

            Of course, these highly concerned parents know much better about such things than neonatologists, pediatricians or immunologists.

          • Roadstergal
            November 10, 2015 at 11:32 am #

            “during a time when their blood-brain barrier is compromised”

            If your child has had a stroke, or a massive head trauma, then the timing of the vaccines is the least of your worries.

          • moto_librarian
            November 10, 2015 at 5:24 pm #

            My god, you are such an idiot. How exactly would a vaccine cause a baby’s blood-brain barrier to be compromised? Or are you one of the geniuses who thinks vaccines are injected directly into the bloodstream.

          • Charybdis
            November 10, 2015 at 8:04 pm #

            Vaccines can certainly make you immune to disease, and they can also help “tune” the immune system so that even if the strain of virus in the vaccine is not the same as the one currently making the rounds, it can help reduce the severity of the infection. This happens a lot with the flu vaccine, since an educated guess as to what strain is going to be virulent *next* year happens early enough for the vaccine to be grown and produced.

            Vaccines can also require periodic boosters to maintain effective protection. See the tetanus shot for an example. Pertussis also requires periodic boosters; maybe not for everybody, but for certain classes of people. To make it easy, they combined it with the tetanus as DTaP. A good friend of mine had her titers done when she started PA school. Her measles titer was on the low side, so she opted to get another MMR. My Hep B titer waned after a number of years, so I had to get another series.

            My mother had both me and my brother immunized against smallpox when we were very little. I think I am the only person I know (except my brother) in age group that has been vaccinated against smallpox. Mom had them do it on my shoulder blade so the scar would not be visible if I wanted to wear sleeveless shirts/blouses/dresses. My husband, who is my age, did NOT get the smallpox vaccination, nor have many of our friends.

            My son, when he was 9 months old, caught chicken pox. I have NO IDEA where he caught it, I was planning on getting the varicella vaccine when he was a year old, when it is recommended. Nope. Too late. He actually had the chicken pox. And that was ALL KINDS OF NOT FUN. His pediatrician says that he is one of his only patients who has had the actual infection, as most people get the vaccine. He has some scars from the chicken pox. When he turns 12 (or 13), I’m getting him the HPV vaccine as well. He will also get the meningitis vaccine (is that the HiB? I can’t remember right now) when it is due. Even if it doesn’t guarantee 100% immunity, it will drastically lower his chances of dying from a VPD. And that is all I can realistically expect.

          • Amazed
            November 9, 2015 at 10:38 pm #

            Of course she only wants vaccinated people to babysit. After suffering the horrors of a few whole days in the hospital just to get her baby out as safe as possible, why would she expose him to a bunch of disease vectors, no matter how much she loves them?

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 1:02 am #

            If her baby is vaccinated, and vaccines protect people against what they are vaccinated against, then her child would be safe. Or does the vaccines not protect her kid?

          • Amazed
            November 10, 2015 at 1:09 am #

            Yes. If her baby was born 2 months old. Or 4 months old. Or 12 months old and so on. You know, the age vaccines are given at.

            Actually, no, you don’t know. Logic fail. Not surprised.

            A homebirther and a freeloader. Again, not surprised.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 2:02 am #

            I’m a freeloader now?

            Boy, it must feel good for you in your self-righteous bubble to look down on all of us evil idiots, huh? 😉

            Regarding actual facts, I was referring to a child AFTER vaccines. Why would it be unsafe for that child to hang out with a non-vaccinated child. But, you don’t seem interesting in actually addressing the issues at hand. Much more fun to just practice your name calling, eh?

          • Amazed
            November 10, 2015 at 2:09 am #

            Not as fun as practicing freeloading, I bet.

            You were referring to a child AFTER vaccines? You were talking about a baby, but let’s leave that aside for now. Why, were you under the misguided impression that we think vaccines are fail-proof, the way you think homebirth is? Nope. No one claims that vaccines are 100% effective, so why invite the risk? Antivaxxers can cry foul all they want, no one can force a mother to endanger her baby for their sake.

            And what about a child who is too young to be vaccinated? I guess your heart goes out to this poor informed mother in Germany who rushed her little unvaccinated disease vector to the pediatrician and infected a bunch of other kids in the waiting room, all of them too young to be vaccinated? Two of them DIED of complications, in a horrific way. But hey, that’s no concern of those who give Vitamin D. Because it replaces vaccines. Totally!

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 2:13 am #

            i pity any children you have. Your constant sarcasm, name calling, and belittling is a freedom I’m sure you love you have. But, use that and your shaming toward your kids, and you will damage them.

            If you care about physical health, I hope you will grow to care about that.

          • Amazed
            November 10, 2015 at 2:25 am #

            Bingo! I think we should add this to the list. Such a moving concern for other people’s wellbeing.

            Perhaps you could make a step further and stop presenting homebirth risks and hospital birth risks as equal?

          • Linden
            November 10, 2015 at 6:18 am #

            I hope my son grows up in a world that doesn’t suffer dangerous fools gladly.

          • Roadstergal
            November 10, 2015 at 11:30 am #

            SB277 passed in California! I never thought we would see a step that positive in, well, this state.

          • Sarah
            November 10, 2015 at 6:44 am #

            I pity your children if you’re antivax. Which you clearly are.

          • Tiffany Aching
            November 10, 2015 at 1:46 pm #

            Has it maybe occurred to you that you don’t really behave the same way with kids you love and adults you’ve never met ?

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 2:16 am #

            For the record, you are currently a troll.

            And although I could take the time to give you thoughtful answers about the issues you bring up, because I do understand and care about your concerns, I find it unwise to feed the trolls.

            If other people want my opinion, great, I will be more than happy to discuss and respond. But you yourself are just being a troll.

          • yugaya
            November 10, 2015 at 3:30 am #

            “For the record, you are currently a troll.”

            Says a parachuter to a regular. 😀

          • Amazed
            November 10, 2015 at 3:36 am #

            To be fair, I’m quite aggressive in this thread. I am done being polite with parachuters who rush in breathlessly expecting to stun us with the OMG 30% C-section rate, them evil interventions and then hit the antivaccine tropes, throwing in some hints that home and hospitals are equally likely to lead to sad outcomes. Being polite and engaging them this far has only served to give their views undeserved popularity and credubility – the very existence of the antivaxx movement shows it.

            This said, she’s been quite respectful to me, given my behavior here.

          • Sarah
            November 10, 2015 at 6:43 am #

            I’m just impressed with the ego of someone who thinks they can rock up, post some drivel and immediately decide who’s a troll and who isn’t. Like, they make up in arrogance what they lack in medical knowledge.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 12:21 pm #

            Where is Bofa, he need to explain Pablo’s first law of the internet here.

          • The Computer Ate My Nym
            November 10, 2015 at 4:35 am #

            I believe the approximate translation of ‘you are currently a troll’ is ‘I can’t think of any counterarguments so I’m going to claim persecution and refuse to engage you any more.’

          • Sarah
            November 10, 2015 at 6:41 am #

            If people wanted your opinion, no doubt they’d ask for it. We seem rather low on such requests at present, though.

          • Bugsy
            November 10, 2015 at 11:23 am #

            Yep. We have an absolutely amazing babysitter for our 3-year-old who is a pro-vax mommy but who declines the flu shot for herself. Until we’re past flu season, we won’t risk exposing our obviously unvaccinated 4-day-old to her. We love her dearly, but it’s not worth the risk.

          • Amazed
            November 10, 2015 at 12:23 pm #

            Definitely not worth it!

          • Nick Sanders
            November 10, 2015 at 2:22 am #

            Because most vaccines are 80 to 99% effective. The kid will probably be fine, but why risk it?

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 2:52 am #

            That is exactly it. He most likely WON’T get anything if he goes over to get babysat by an unvaccinated family. Even though we live in an area where pertussis and measles have recently been a problem. He is almost two, so I am more worried about him getting the flu than anything else and again, they are ingesting the concoction mentioned above (it has a whole clove of garlic in it!) to ward off the flu. They “don’t like” vaccinations or antibiotics, so they use all kinds of other things that won’t do anything. Like garlic.
            She and I had heated discussion about home birth when I wanted to be a CPM. Since we had a friend whose baby was stillborn due to GBS (nothing to do with midwives or home birth btw), she felt that GBS screening should be more stringent for anyone who wanted a homebirth (as in it can’t be declined) and that GBS should be automatic grounds for transfer. She didn’t understand the garlic or douching or probiotics nonsense that is often suggested. She can’t seem to apply that insight to anything else though.

          • yugaya
            November 10, 2015 at 3:29 am #

            These people work in absolutes only – all birth is inherently safe, natural is always best. That is why they can’t grasp that no one in their right mind claims that vaccines are 100% effective.

            Epidemiology, biostatistics and basic common sense fail all over.

          • Hoter
            November 12, 2015 at 10:49 am #

            Your supposition about vaccine efficacy is a fallacy.

          • Nick Sanders
            November 12, 2015 at 11:23 am #

            Define “fallacy”.

          • Wren
            November 12, 2015 at 11:40 am #


            Oh so the many, many studies are not evidence?

          • Hoter
            November 14, 2015 at 11:50 am #

            Apparently not Wren. Medical peer review is in disrepute, the editors are all telling us that most of what is published is utter nonsense and effectively overwhelmed by funding bias. It is a real problem because sites like this are born from the myth of medical peer review

          • Wren
            November 14, 2015 at 12:52 pm #

            It’s difficult to believe so many studies are “utter nonsense”. Yes, there are some issues with peer review, but replicated studies over decades are not the issue.

          • Hoter
            November 14, 2015 at 5:04 pm #

            What you believe isn’t very interesting. What is interesting is that why is a site like this posting so much utter ponk – as pseudo fact? Do they really think that if they say it enough – people will believe it? I mean you obviously do, you need to get out a bit more. This thread is particularly ridiculous, just a massive appeal to emotion.

          • Sue
            November 20, 2015 at 12:26 am #

            The “myth of medical peer review” is nothing in comparison to the myths of anti-vaxers or of infectious disease deniers.

          • Hoter
            November 22, 2015 at 6:14 pm #

            There isn’t any evidence for vaccine efficacy because none of the vaccines have been tested against placebo to show they are effective at stopping disease. Please don’t trot out that septic troupe about ethics and placebos, it is a weasel word smokescreen.

          • Charybdis
            November 14, 2015 at 6:14 pm #

            And your willful ignorance is appalling

          • Hoter
            November 16, 2015 at 8:08 am #

            Your septic cut and pasting is tirelessly predictable, only surpassed by your lack of critical inquiry.

          • Charybdis
            November 16, 2015 at 8:50 am #

            Are you sure you are insulting the correct person? I haven’t cut and pasted anything.

          • Hoter
            November 16, 2015 at 11:16 am #

            Must just come naturally, or chemically, which is it?

          • Charybdis
            November 16, 2015 at 11:31 am #

            What, exactly, are you blathering about?

          • Hoter
            November 14, 2015 at 11:47 am #

            Last years flu vaccine was claimed to be 3% effective. Where do you get your mythical figures Nick’

          • Nick Sanders
            November 14, 2015 at 1:47 pm #

            Last I heard, it was 27%, not three. Of course, that’s because the flu vaccine only covers 3 or 4 strains of flu, out of thousands. They have to guess years in advance which strains will be the most common in a given year, and they don’t always guess right. However, against those particular strains, the protection is pretty darn strong.

            Vaccines against other diseases do not have that problem, as there are far fewer strains, which do not mutate nearly as often, and in some cases, all the strains share the same external immune markers.

          • Hoter
            November 14, 2015 at 5:14 pm #

            Do you just make it up, or are you a vaccine researcher Nick. Whooping cough vaccine has been failing since the 90’s. The easiest way to avoid the need for flu is to stay heathy, it has nothing to do with vaccination, I don’t know where you got that idea.

          • fiftyfifty1
            November 14, 2015 at 5:34 pm #

            “The easiest way to avoid the need for flu is to stay heathy”

            Wow. That is wise. It’s like saying “The easiest way to avoid poverty is to be rich”.

          • Hoter
            November 16, 2015 at 8:07 am #

            You believe flu is an illness, I believe it is the consequence of not being healthy. Medicine has no cure for flu or colds, even Dawkins admits ‘no one would deny the ubiquitousness of the common cold’.
            The meme of colds and flu doesn’t fit his broken view of why these events are part of our immune function, not failure. It is why we can’t get ‘rid’ of them, the same way we throw up or crap through the eye of a needle if we eat rubbish. The way to avoid it is to learn how to stay well and not need the event.

          • Wren
            November 16, 2015 at 8:57 am #

            OK, there are no germs, all illness is the fault of the person who becomes unwell because he or she somehow did not live healthily enough. Newborns who have had nothing but breastmilk from mothers who eat nothing but a healthy organic diet are probably at fault due to their own negative thinking or something.

            Yep, you’re totally right. Now you can stop with your anti-science views here.

          • Hoter
            November 16, 2015 at 11:19 am #

            Wow, a germ denialist! the point is, why are the germs there? They don’t just appear as if by magik. Germs breed in waste, the point is to lessen the waste, not just keep pouring disinfectant everywhere.

            flu arriving as if by magik is a really weird idea, where did you get that? Did you catch it?

          • MaineJen
            November 16, 2015 at 1:45 pm #

            “Lessen the waste” How?

            (10 points to Ravenclaw if he mentions colon irrigation…)

          • Hoter
            November 22, 2015 at 6:04 pm #

            Well there are at least two ways to lessen waste. One is to make the need for waste less, and the other is to make sure the waste removal systems are working well and not obstructed. How difficult was that, oh I forgot you are a medic and all disease mysteriously arrives as bad luck – how scientific are you?

          • Wren
            November 17, 2015 at 2:41 am #

            Of course! Germs appear by magic only in waste. Germs are not transmitted from one person to another. That’s silly, right?

          • Hoter
            November 22, 2015 at 6:10 pm #

            you stupid cunt. the new york subway swabs for almost every known pathogen. The people that ‘catch them’ are the ones who are good breeding grounds. healthy people don’t ‘catch’ other people’s flora.

          • Wren
            November 22, 2015 at 6:14 pm #

            Of course not. There is absolutely no evidence of transmission of any kind of illness from one person to another.

          • Hoter
            November 30, 2015 at 12:26 pm #

            There is if you eat crap and rely on vaccination for ‘protection’. Taking anti fever meds, anti inflammatories in the constipated, lots of reasons lots of people get ill.

          • Wren
            November 30, 2015 at 4:27 pm #

            Yes, there are lots of reasons people get ill. In many cases, the reason is a bacteria or virus transmitted from another host, usually another person. Vaccines reduce this by huge percentages, but you go on pretending that it’s just somehow healthy eating (because our ancestors all ate tons of non-organic stuff back when they died many decades earlier, right?) or medications, many of which are correlated with reduced death rates from illness.

          • Hoter
            November 30, 2015 at 5:31 pm #

            So who told you these fallacies Wren. Why is it that cows fed on corn rather than fresh grass fill up with ecoli 157. This is highly pathogenic. But when they are put back onto grass, within days the ecoli 157 is gone. Surely it makes more sense to feed them on low starch natural diets rather than feed them on an unnatural diet that makes them lethal. The American farmers who do this corn crap, think it is ok to spray the meat with ammonia to kill the ecoli.
            Don’t quote a shit study that used hay as a real grass substitute.
            Our ancestors didn’t have brilliant housing or sewage systems or particularly clean water nor central heating either.
            If the New York subway swabs positive for almost every pathogen going, why are we not all dying?

          • Sasilda
            February 28, 2016 at 5:39 pm #

            Wow, that was an eloquent retort. Using the “c” word…sounds like you are getting very angry. Careful now…you might cause yourself to get sick with all those negative thoughts running through your “healthy” body. Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Nick Sanders
            November 16, 2015 at 11:29 am #

            What does Dawkins have to do with any of this? And what the fuck is “the meme of colds and flu”?

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 16, 2015 at 12:02 pm #

            It’s magical thinking. It’s the belief that emotions and attitudes cause specific illnesses. For example, getting the flu or a cold means that you “believe in sickness” and “your own failing vitality” (hey, I was very into this before I wised up, don’t laugh!). Having asthma means that you have people who are smothering you or you are allowing yourself to be smothered by a belief. There is a whole bunch of books devoted to this, Louise Hay’s “You Can Heal Your Life” is one of the most famous. It’s subtle victim blaming but the idea is that you can create new thoughts and those thoughts can make you healthy.

          • Sue
            November 20, 2015 at 12:24 am #

            Influenza is not about “eating rubbish” – it’s about being exposed to the virus.

            Influenza is a viral infection. it;s not “part of our immune system”.

          • Hoter
            November 22, 2015 at 6:11 pm #

            Soooo in the dark ages on this one ‘guest’. So you are a flu catcher believer. mmmm

          • Nick Sanders
            November 14, 2015 at 6:15 pm #

            Yawn. Just keep spinning those wheels, buddy.

          • Hoter
            November 16, 2015 at 8:10 am #

            I guess you are a medical convert. Unable to engage in a critical discussion, no wonder medicine is in the mess it is and the health of the population is starting to dwindle – fertility goes first in the lineage to extinction.

          • Wren
            November 16, 2015 at 8:58 am #

            Yes, the longer lives and higher infant survival rate are clear evidence of the decline of the health of the population.

          • Hoter
            November 16, 2015 at 11:20 am #

            Unless you live in a third world country – due to aid funding both cohorts are getting vaccines, why are vaccines less effective the closer you get to the equator? Is it magik?

          • Nick Sanders
            November 16, 2015 at 11:20 am #

            I’m not sure which is worse, that you think medicine is something one “converts” to, or that you think I’m the one unable to think critically.

            I will say that fertility is doing fine, people are just voluntarily choosing to have fewer children. It’s what happens when you don’t have to worry about most of them dying.

          • Sarah
            November 10, 2015 at 6:40 am #

            If you were specifically referring to a fully vaccinated baby, giving you the benefit of the doubt for a moment, the onus was on you to make that very clear.

          • Sue
            November 20, 2015 at 12:22 am #

            That old anti-vax trope AGAIN?

            Pro Tip #1: Less than 100% of the vaccinated sero-convert
            Pro Tip #2: Less than 100% does not mean 0%

            Want to try another one?

          • yugaya
            November 10, 2015 at 3:25 am #

            Shock. Horror. I know. I feel your pain. She must be one of those people who always uses child car seat too.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 11:04 am #

            You got me! I am the one who buckles my child in as he screams and planks. Sorry kid, we are only driving a few miles but you are precious. I will put up with your protest and keep you safe.

        • Bugsy
          November 9, 2015 at 8:37 pm #

          Argh, I’m so sorry to hear that. Vaccination was the issue that finally killed my friendship with Crazy Lactivist. Even knowing that we were about as far apart on this issue as we could be, a friendship deteriorating still sucks. (hugs)

    • Mishimoo
      November 9, 2015 at 6:19 pm #

      I hope he gets the DTaP as well, and that it doesn’t take severe illness to change her mind. My brother-in-law believes many of those conspiracy theories (The birth control/depopulation/chemtrails/Monsanto/Big Pharma tend to go together) and was leaning towards antivax until he saw a dog die of tetanus and then most of a litter from parvo. Here’s hoping it’s not the same case for your friend.

      • Bombshellrisa
        November 9, 2015 at 6:35 pm #

        I hope not. What convinced my husband to get a Dtap was watching a YouTube video of a baby with pertussis. He didn’t want to be the reason our baby might get that sick. He also was raised by a grandma and aunt who had polio as children and he saw post polio syndrome first hand.
        It should be noted that she believes (like most anti vaxxers) that herd immunity is a myth.

        • Mishimoo
          November 9, 2015 at 7:20 pm #

          Ugh, I hate that! Herd immunity is actually pretty cool.

          My husband had his DTaP booster thanks to a coolant burn, and realised how important flu shots are when the flu once laid him out for 6 weeks. Like I said, I hope her mind changes without being pushed by serious illness or injury, because it really sucks that her kids might have to live (or not) with her crappy decisions. (Like me: currently chasing up post-chickenpox neurological symptoms, and my mother is claiming she was never ever antivax.)

      • The Computer Ate My Nymp
        November 10, 2015 at 4:30 am #

        If the Grand Conspiracy’s goal is spreading birth control and depopulating the world, all I can say is that they’re massively incompetent. Do people who believe this ever look at the change in population over the past few decades? Or is this one of those covert racist beliefs where they’re all worried about the birth rate in the white population?

        • Mishimoo
          November 10, 2015 at 5:16 am #

          It’s definitely the latter. All white Christians are under attack, dontcha know? *eyeroll*

          (I was raised with that, it’s amazing that 20 years on, people still believe it. Though to be fair, now it’s more picking on Muslims rather than “Satanists run the world!!”)

    • mythsayer
      November 9, 2015 at 6:45 pm #

      Please make sure she understands he needs a tetanus booster at least at some point… at LEAST that…

      • D/
        November 10, 2015 at 2:09 pm #

        I’ve been on a binge for a while now at Open Library, reading archived texts and such. Medical accounts from the 1800s should be required reading for anyone lacking the imagination to understand why vaccines exist. This one is a testimony for tetanus (and rabies) vaccination for both man and “brute”.


    • Tiffany Aching
      November 9, 2015 at 7:24 pm #

      Somebody who wastes pineapple, ginger and lemon (useless against flu, but sounds delicious) by adding garlic is definitely not “too smart for her own good”.

      • Nick Sanders
        November 10, 2015 at 2:18 am #

        Funny, I feel the same way about ginger, lemon, and garlic having pineapple added. :p

        • Bombshellrisa
          November 10, 2015 at 2:39 am #

          Oh come on, it might be delicious as a chicken marinade : )

          • Nick Sanders
            November 10, 2015 at 2:40 am #

            Not if you don’t like pineapple.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 2:53 am #

            True. Either you love it or hate it. I prefer mine in a drink or Dole Whip.

          • Chi
            November 10, 2015 at 2:54 am #

            The only way I like pineapple is in a juice form with copious amounts of white rum or midori in it.

          • Roadstergal
            November 10, 2015 at 6:25 pm #

            POG + dark rum almost makes me believe in a higher power.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 10, 2015 at 6:37 pm #

            Yum, POG and rum is a special kind of ecstasy.

          • Bugsy
            November 10, 2015 at 11:17 am #

            That sounds really good!

        • Tiffany Aching
          November 10, 2015 at 5:54 am #

          Very good point.

  10. Hillary
    November 9, 2015 at 5:51 pm #

    Dr. Tuteur, I do not know you, so I can’t speak in regards to you specifically. However, I can say, from experience and from experience of friends and family, that maybe if obstetricians were better drs, more women wouldn’t be leaving towards more homebirths. Obstetricians are almost always more for themselves than for the mothers. And the ones that aren’t, have a very poor medical education. It hasn’t always been this way, but you referred to ‘modern’ obstetrics and I’m here to tell you, that it sucks. Maybe you are one of the very few who actually allow a mother’s body to do it’s job. If so, I have very much respect for you. But the reality is simply that when a mother goes into a hospital to give birth, from the minute she walks in, there is SO MUCH intervention that her body can’t birth properly. And she’s on a time crunch. It’s so sad that Dr’s push women to have a baby within a specific time frame so it best benefits their schedules, rather than being available any time of the day or night for their patients. Women are coerced to induce labor if it doesn’t happen when the drs want. And then they are pushed into c-sections when they don’t necessarily need them. They are terrified out of vbacs. They are not given proper medical information. Patients trust obstetricians and they are failing their patients. Sometimes they even go as far as tying a woman’s tubes and not telling her until 2 days later! YES! This actually happened. To me, actually.
    Dr Tuteur, maybe if this wasn’t becoming the true reality of ‘modern’ obstetrics, women wouldn’t be so scared to have a hospital birth.
    I was forced into 2 c-sections. In between those I had a successful vbac and would have had another but they have me no choice. They went on to tie my tubes without me knowing. It’s been 8 years and my tubes were reversed but I still struggle to get pregnant. I’ve lost several babies since then. I’m still very hopeful and I can assure you that if I do actually get to have another baby, I will not step foot in a hospital unless it’s a life or death situation. I would plan a hba2c and that’s based off of plenty of information. I trust that more than I trust modern drs and the reason is because modern drs are failing mothers more than they are helping them.
    Maybe before you attack women for the decision they’ve made, you should take a step back and realize that most women have VERY good reasons for their decisions in regards to childbirth. If you want to see that changed, maybe you should attack the root issue (modern obstetrics), rather than the mothers.
    You being an obstetrician, have a tremendous platform to make a difference. But I can assure you, that attacking these girls the way you have, makes no difference to women who choose homebirths because it’s drs like you that are causing them to choose it in the first place.
    Years ago, drs attended homebirths. They were true drs. They went out of their way. Now women are expected to waddle up to the hospital and have a baby during a 12 hour shift, a while strapped to a bed and deprived of water. It’s ridiculous.

    • Who?
      November 9, 2015 at 5:58 pm #

      How has Dr T attacked ‘the girls’? She pointed out that they both had life threatening complications and required emergency medical care. She explained in great detail why each of those young women would likely have died without.

      She attacks those who lie about how safe homebirth is.

      • FEDUP MD
        November 10, 2015 at 3:56 pm #

        Plus, how are these women “girls?” They are all over the age of 18, hence, women. Otherwise is insulting.

    • mostlyclueless
      November 9, 2015 at 6:07 pm #

      Your OB was mean to you. My OB was nice to me. Whose anecdote wins? Are OBs good or bad?

      • Who?
        November 9, 2015 at 6:09 pm #

        I gave birth in hospital and never had an OB, though one wandered in both times as I was delivering.

        How’s that for an anecdote?

      • the wingless one
        November 9, 2015 at 6:10 pm #

        My MFM (and his jr partner) and my OB were both nice to me, so was the resident OB who saw me when I had a little scare at 32 weeks. Come to think of it so was the OB who assisted in my c-section.

        • mostlyclueless
          November 9, 2015 at 6:13 pm #

          Hmm, so that’s one mean OB, and four nice ones.

          If only there was some way to use numbers to analyze all these experiences collectively. Maybe someone who’s good at math will figure out a way!

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 9, 2015 at 6:23 pm #

            Maybe we should beg Abby to come back and use her dynamite math skills to help us.
            I was treated like crap by a CNM and PA the first time around with my daughter and felt like the OB I ended up with and the laborist who delivered my son wanted me to express my feelings about things. If I had wanted to talk, I felt like they would have been good listeners. The asshat of an L&D nurse who wanted to have me take deep breaths and relax to ease my labor pain instead of her calling for my epidural still takes the cake as the meanest person on the planet. Being in so much pain and begging, pleading and finally crying and screaming for help, for relief was dehumanizing and humiliating.

          • mythsayer
            November 9, 2015 at 7:04 pm #

            I would have screamed at her repeatedly until that medicine came.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 9, 2015 at 7:58 pm #

            By the time I dissolved into that i was at 10 centimeters. I was young and felt like crap anyway because I was on Medicaid and already felt like a charity case.
            When my son was born, if I hadn’t have come in at 9 1/2 and at 10 when I was wheeled into my room, I would have screened my nurse for any sadistic tendencies.

      • Bugsy
        November 9, 2015 at 8:39 pm #

        My OB back in the states was great. My OB here in Canada was even better – and I lucked out on having her being the attending OB for my son’s delivery last week. I love my OBs. 🙂

      • Gatita
        November 9, 2015 at 10:09 pm #

        I switched OBs when I was 28 weeks pregnant because I was so unhappy with the care the first one gave me. So sucky OBs do exist. But you’ll notice I didn’t decide to have a homebirth.

    • mythsayer
      November 9, 2015 at 7:02 pm #

      Look, I see piles and piles of doctors because I have an autoimmune disease that refuses to manifest clearly… so although I know it is connective tissue related, I still live in medical mystery hell. I have seen some really, really crappy doctors. In fact, even the good and nice doctors piss me off more often than not.

      But that doesn’t justify putting a baby in danger. So your doctor was mean to you? Is your baby okay? Then good. Be grateful for that and then complain to the patient administration department about the care you received. You can do that, you know. I did it for my mom when a doctor almost killed my mom. But will I keep my mom home if she gets cellulitis again? NO! Because she could DIE from that. The solution isn’t to not see doctors. The solution is to work the system as best you can.

      I understand being traumatized… I really do. You know what would have traumatized me? A NATURAL BIRTH. Yup. It’s true. I was scared to death of the idea of a vaginal birth even WITH pain meds (what if they didn’t work… omg…). And yet even with all that fear, I was willing to give a Japanese OB a chance instead of going to the American hospital in Tokyo five hours away from our base. Can you imagine YOU giving him a chance? Probably not, since you probably have an obsession with being in charge. Nevermind that the Japanese C-Section rate is far lower than ours. So you’d have a good chance of having a vaginal birth with no meds there and yet I bet you’d still have freaked out just because they do things a little differently there.

      I think it’s not doctors that are the problem with you home birth people. It’s control. You just want to be in control over everything. And yet ironically, you think modern medicine will save you if something DOES go wrong. So if your body DOES break, suddenly those “bad” doctors should save you? Come on. That’s ridiculous.

      Do you have any REAL evidence that interventions cause C-Sections? I doubt it. And how do you know that your C-Sections were unnecessary? I’ll tell you: you don’t.

      Can you at least admit that women died in droves 100 years ago? Why do you think that was? It wasn’t solely because of hygiene, I’ll tell you that. And how do you explain away the MANA numbers that show that homebirth is far more dangerous? I’ll bet you can’t. I’ll bet you just ignore those statistics.

      Here’s the thing… you didn’t say ANYTHING that makes me thing you are thinking about the safety of the baby. It’s all about YOU and what YOU want. You know what? Having a healthy baby after a C-Section, absolutely necessary or not, is far better than having an HIE damaged one. I would far rather be “traumatized” by a C-Section (although I asked for one so it was vaginal birth that scared me… I know… THE HORROR… I must not love my daughter… which is totally hypocritical of home birthers to say because… well… CHOICE… if you an choose homebirth, I can choose a C-Section) than a damaged baby… or a damaged me.

      Now if the tube tying thing is true (which I seriously question… I think there must be more to this story… and if it’s true, why didn’t you sue?) then that’s wrong. But that is more akin to amputating the wrong limb. That’s a generalized doctor problem. It’s not a birth problem. Don’t confuse the issues. You can have legitimate issues with care without there being problems with how your baby was born.

      • Hillary
        November 9, 2015 at 8:02 pm #

        I’m not against medical intervention or drs. In fact I see them and am still seeking help to have a baby. And I don’t condemn you for your choice to have a c-section. I just hate that women who choose homebirths are condemned for it. They are made out to be foolish women and it simply isn’t true. All that I said was against modern obstetrics being made to look as if it’s always better than natural birthing methods.
        I’m not sure what your rant towards me has to do with. I was only directing my comment towards the writer of this article. She has written other articles regarding these girls and she needs to stop.
        I don’t care to keep discussing anything with you so don’t bother commenting. Take your rants to someone else

        • Amazed
          November 9, 2015 at 8:17 pm #

          I find it telling that you only deigned to respond to the “rants” and not the other posts.

          No one makes modern obstetrics look always better than natural birthing methods. Except for you creating your strawman, of course.

          You know, the fact that modern obstetrics is always better has been PROVEN by the fact that when things go bad, it’s homebirthers who run to the hospital and bleat, “Save me doc!” (That’s a reference to the fact that so many of them call the women who birth in a hospital Hospital births, on the other hand, treat birth itself as an emergency. And they end up with a 33% C-section rate (way higher than is helpful or necessary) and a high rate of interventions and babies born less healthy. , in case you’re wondering.) It isn’t hospital birthers running to midwives or the solitude of home to birth unassisted.

          The fact that modern obstetrics is always better has ALSO been proven by the fact that it at hospital, women who are good candidates for natural birth usually get it. Modern obstetrics INCLUDE natural birthing methods – really natural, I mean, not castor oil for induction or stevia for treating the lack of amniotic fluid. But natural birth at home doesn’t include modern obstetrics. There isn’t a C-section on your kitchen table, no matter just how emergent it is.

          Stop defending “the girls”. They’re women grown, they make their choices, they shove it into the faces of the whole wide world, so they can take the backlash of everyone they made aware.

          Wome who choose homebirth are not immune to condemnation for their stupid, selfish, dangerous choice. Yes, it is stupid, selfish and dangerous because now the information is there. Even MANA’s own stats show the same trend. Now, women know. They just sing the old song of, “I don’t like it, I won’t believe it.” Fine. I’ll fight to death to defend their right to make their stupid, selfish, dangerous choice, once they’re informed. But expecting that I’d call it anything else is not reasonable. I support their right to make it and that’s enough.

    • ForeverMe
      November 9, 2015 at 7:18 pm #

      My most recent OB was awesome. He delivered my youngest two children. By c-section. At my request. (For the 1st c-section, I had certain risk factors that I preferred be placed on me, instead of my child.) I elected for a second because I still remember the awful pain of my first drug free delivery, and again preferred to place the risk on me (having surgery) and not on my child (uterine rupture).

      Which turned out to be a good idea because less than a yr after my 3rd child’s delivery, an IUD (Mirena, all plastic) spontaneously perforated my uterus, which is not supposed to happen (it was well after insertion). And the OB at the hospital was awful. Seriously. She was horrible- bordering on malpractice (& I know- I’m an attorney), and she was actually really *mean*. But she operated on me anyway (in the middle of the night, around 3 am, in fact)….and she found and removed that wandering IUD….

      And after my post op, I simply returned to my “nice” OB …. not the hospital OB who I didn’t like. See how that works?

      Doctors are people, and, just like any other people, they have unique personalities, quirks, etc. Some are great. Some are awful. The existence of awful OB’s doesn’t mean “modern obstetrics” is a problem. The awful person is the problem.

      And childbirth is inherently dangerous. Walk through a graveyard that dates back to at least 1900. Or talk to someone who was alive to remember births before (or has been to a place without) “modern obstetrics.” They’ll tell you- birth is not safe, but giving birth attended by OB’s has made birth *seem* safe.

    • RMY
      November 9, 2015 at 9:35 pm #

      >Sometimes they even go as far as tying a woman’s tubes and not telling her until 2 days later

      >They went on to tie my tubes without me knowing


      That’s very illegal and the type of lawsuit material every malpractice lawyer dreams of (a slam dunk case). It also goes against modern medical ethical practices.

      Bad doctors do exist, as do bad policemen, bad waitresses, and bad accountants. But most people and most professionals are good. Doctors are able to be sued and can reprimanded by professional organizations and lose their license.

    • Ardea
      November 10, 2015 at 12:14 am #

      My OB with my first daughter was so awesome that many women named their daughters after her.

    • Montserrat Blanco
      November 10, 2015 at 11:18 am #

      I had one crappy OB during my pregnancy.

      So I asked and was granted not to have to see her again in my whole life.

      If you got your tubes tied without your consent, please do sue that doctor. I have no interest whatsoever in sharing my profession with a criminal.

      In any case if your experience with one particular doctor was bad and you think that is a reason for everybody to consider a homebirth… I had a couple of bad experiences with plumbers and that did not make it to perform my own annual heaters check ups…

    • The Computer Ate My Nym
      November 11, 2015 at 3:22 am #

      Women are coerced to induce labor if it doesn’t happen when the drs want.

      Yeah, those evil doctors, coercing women into getting induced at 41 weeks just because the rate of intrauterine death goes up steeply after 40 weeks. Terrible! Why don’t they just let the mother’s body do its job and understand that some babies weren’t meant to live. Never mind that they’re perfectly developed and healthy and their only problem is that they’re suffering from inadequate oxygen from a failing placenta: If they can’t find their way out on their own they weren’t meant to live and it’s only weakening the species to let them survive. CPMs who allow women to bleed to death in front of them and babies to suffocate are so much wiser. Aren’t they, Hillary? Because that’s what you’re arguing. You may not mean to be doing so, but you are. Is that what you want? More deaths? Congratulations! By pimping for NCB, you’re adding to the amount of death and suffering in the world. Nice job!

  11. Skarlet Pike
    November 9, 2015 at 5:05 pm #

    All homebirths in America also utilize the hospital as a backup option in case of complications or emergency.

    Hospital births, on the other hand, treat birth itself as an emergency. And they end up with a 33% C-section rate (way higher than is helpful or necessary) and a high rate of interventions and babies born less healthy. This is partly because laboring in a hospital generally takes longer – they don’t give food like at home, you can’t walk around like at home, it’s a new environment, and usually they hook you up to stuff. This usually has the net effect of the woman feeling less relaxed, and therefore a longer labor happens (thus often leading to interventions or C-section).

    That, compared to, home birth where in most cases things go well, and you have freedom, privacy, food, and can walk around. And in the cases where complications arise, you transfer to a hospital and finish things out with the necessary interventions. Best of both worlds.

    Me and my sister gave birth at home, with no complications at all, very healthy babies. My baby’s now 9 months and crawling around the house!!!

    • Amazed
      November 9, 2015 at 5:07 pm #

      “Hospital births, on the other hand, treat birth itself as an emergency.
      And they end up with a 33% C-section rate (way higher than is helpful or
      necessary) and a high rate of interventions and babies born less


    • Roadstergal
      November 9, 2015 at 5:09 pm #

      Do we have Bingo?

      • Bombshellrisa
        November 9, 2015 at 5:58 pm #

        Crap, I missed calling it. I was hoping the prize was something I could regift : )

        • Bugsy
          November 9, 2015 at 8:44 pm #

          It’s a placenta! Ready for encapsulation and everything. 🙂

    • Who?
      November 9, 2015 at 5:10 pm #

      ‘Most’ go well, do they. Well that’s lovely. I guess the others, that would have gone well in hospital, are not important at all.

      The cavalier disregard for life is what blows me away every time about home birthers.

      Oh and do tell what the appropriate level of cs is, since you’re clearly an expert in that area.

      • Skarlet Pike
        November 9, 2015 at 5:49 pm #

        If you think that I have a disregard of life, you are clearly misinformed. It’s silly to think that if people approach a situation with a different viewpoint or strategy than you do, they must not care about the outcome.

        In all birth situations, there is the possibility of complication. Those in the hospital get interventions. Those who choose home births and complications come up transfer to the hospital and get interventions. That’s not saying that anyone isn’t important. Everyone is important.

        What is an appropriate level of cs? Well, your sarcastic reference to me as an expert tells me that you aren’t actually intending that as a sincere question. But if you are curious, there are many sources that you could research about what a healthy rate of C-sections is.

        • Who?
          November 9, 2015 at 5:54 pm #

          I don’t think I can be a hobbyist and know as much as someone who has spent years training.

          I’m glad your baby is okay. You were lucky, you should be grateful.

        • mythsayer
          November 9, 2015 at 7:17 pm #

          No, that’s not true. There are NO actual studies that show what a good CS rate is. Plus, you have to remove every single CS in this country that was requested. Because if it was a maternal request then the question of whether or not it was necessary is irrelevant. I will say this again: IF YOU CAN CHOOSE A HOME BIRTH THEN I CAN CHOOSE A C-SECTION. I think home birth is dangerous. You think C-Sections are bad. Except that the numbers show that C-Sections cause far less damage that home births overall. But I doubt you’d believe any numbers I threw at you.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 9, 2015 at 9:48 pm #

            Of course I agree with you that if I can choose a home birth, then you can choose a C-section. I don’t understand why so many people on this forum are so aggressive…

            I only said that the CS rate is too high because there are various studies that show A) that unnecessary CS are dangerous to the mother and child, and B) that 15% of births or less actually require a CS. The additional 20% in this country represents those risky unnecessary ones. We all have read different stuff, and so we have different ideas I’m sure about what is the safest way to give birth. And we each are free to take the route that we believe to be best.

            Here’s one brief little link. I don’t have time to cite all the reading I’ve done over time, and I doubt that you would have the time to read it all anyway.


          • Michele
            November 9, 2015 at 9:58 pm #

            From http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/maternal_perinatal/faq-cs-section/en/

            “Why a caesarean section rate at population level cannot be applied or used at hospital level?

            In population-based studies, populations are often defined within geopolitical boundaries (e.g. state, country). A caesarean section rate at population level includes, thus, all deliveries in such a geopolitical area. On the other hand, the medical and obstetric
            characteristics of the women attending any particular hospital may and in fact, normally are very different from those of the overall population resulting in different needs for caesarean section and thus different caesarean section rates. For example, larger hospitals tend to receive referrals of most complicated pregnancies or deliveries which in turn, may need more caesarean sections. On the other hand, some small facilities may not even be equipped to conduct caesarean sections.”

          • Sarah
            November 10, 2015 at 7:03 am #

            Try us. There are certainly some pieces of work that attempt to make those claims, but I think you’ll find we’re pretty good at seeing through them round these parts.

            As for the article you list, what on earth makes you think it tells us anything relevant? They clearly start from the position that sections are bad in themselves, hence suggesting it’s unfortunate that it’s easier for them to find a high section rate than a low one. Undermines credibility immediately. And there’s not a thing about the risks of not performing sections, or of VB generally either. Which is what really matters, because sadly any way of getting a baby out comes with risks. It’s a propaganda piece. That you would even cite it suggests you’ve done a lot less actual research than you think you have.

          • The Computer Ate My Nym
            November 10, 2015 at 10:14 am #

            A) Cite the specific studies. Which c-sections do they claim are unnecessary and why?
            B) The 15% number is complete nonsense. It was totally pulled out of someone’s nether regions. Even the person who made the original claim has admitted as much.
            C) Even if the above weren’t true, what criteria do you use to distinguish between a “necessary” and an “unnecessary” c-section? Do you want to put quotas on hospitals or individual doctors and demand that they stop doing c-sections after 15% or what? How many dead or damaged babies and women are acceptable to you to make sure we don’t go over that 15% mark?

          • FEDUP MD
            November 10, 2015 at 4:11 pm #

            So countries across the world are all the same, then? A country like the United States with ever increasing rates of advanced maternal age, obesity, diabetes, multiple births, and hypertension should have a stable c-section rate, despite many of these causing complications requiring c-sections? Versus a developing country where these diseases are less common, and over the lifetime of the woman she is more likely to have multiple other children without medical assistance, raising the risk of uterine rupture if she has a c-section, versus the United States, where she will likely have many fewer children and ready access to medical care when needed?

            All hospitals are the same as well, then? A tiny community hospital where largely low risk women birth should have the same c-section rate as a tertiary care hospital completely filled with high risk women?

        • Azuran
          November 9, 2015 at 9:03 pm #

          And some of the people who birth at home will die or lose their baby during the time it takes to transfer them to the hospital. When your heart stops, 10 minutes away from the hospital might as well be across the country, the result will be the same.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 9, 2015 at 9:50 pm #

            Similarly, I’ve personally known people who have had damage happen to their baby because of what the doctors in hospitals did (sometimes against their wishes). And I mean long term damage, too.

            If we all have in common the goal of having our babies be born healthy, then even if our differing research leads us to differing conclusions about which method is more safe and less risky, I hope we can all support and encourage each other rather than attack and tear each other down.

          • Azuran
            November 9, 2015 at 10:33 pm #

            except that safety is a fact, it’s not up to individual research on differing conclusions. No one is saying that hospital birth is flawless, that no one ever died in hospital birth or that no mistake was ever made. But it’s still safer.
            You have the right to chose homebirth if that is your wish. But no matter what your ‘research’ showed you or what conclusion you personnaly reached, the risk of your baby and/or yourself dying is higher. If you want it, go for it, but don’t lie to yourself. It wasn’t safer. That’s fact and it will remain fact.

          • Amazed
            November 9, 2015 at 10:44 pm #

            You can start by supporting OBPI Mama whose conclusions about which method is more safe (the same as yours) led to very grave consequences. But I can see you studiously omitted her as you poured out your bunch of non-scientific “evidence” and “recommendations” that you cannot understand the meaning of.

            No one says that hospital birth is always this great and preventable mistakes don’t happen. Dr Amy writes about them. You? You boast about you and your sister and refuse to acknowledge a mother who chose homebirth and suffered for it because the smooth transfer that in your fantasy will save the day didn’t happen.

            You aren’t more supportive of those who don’t (or no longer) toe the party line than I am of homebirthers. The only difference is that I don’t pretend about it.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 10, 2015 at 1:17 am #

            Well, I’m glad you don’t pretend things, because maskiness never got anyone anywhere in life. Being real is the way to go, whether people love you or hate you for it.

            I’m sad to hear, though, that you are proud about your choice to be unsupportive and unkind toward those who come to different conclusions than you.

            I am supportive of OBPI Mama, and, contrary to your presuppositions, I am not trying to omit anyone. All good things in good time. Or maybe you think that I have all the time in the world. That would be nice. But, that’s a fantasy, friend.

            I also know people, like I’ve said, whose child suffered long term consequences as a result of the hospital setting. There are risks to both settings, and it is tragic when bad things happen either way.

            Maybe you think that home birth moms don’t care about their kids, because you don’t give people the benefit of the doubt, and assume they have bad motives. Life isn’t like that, though. Also, if you care so much about the babies of home-birthing moms, why do you care so little about home-birthing moms?

          • Who?
            November 10, 2015 at 1:35 am #

            Many home birth mothers are ignorant of the true risks, and most seriously displeased when they learn they have been lied to. Some post here from time to time.

            Many homebirith mothers frankly give primacy to their experience.

            Many, like you, are lucky and never get wiser.

          • Amazed
            November 10, 2015 at 1:49 am #

            Being kind is not the same as being truthful. I read your replu to OBPI Mama (after I mentioned that you omitted her, I might add). You keep parading the lies, insinuating that home and hospital have the same risks. A great idea of “support”, no doubt. But hey, when the next woman that isn’t fortunate enough to be transferred in time comes around, you’ll give her a virtual pat on the head and whisper your comforting deceiving lines about home and hospital risks, so you’d look kind. Great!

            I don’t care about homebirthing mothers because I assume they’re adult women who make their own decisions. It isn’t my place to make their decisions for them. I want them to be informed – and by that, I don’t mean the skewed picture you’re presenting. On EVERYTHING. From there, it’s up to them. I value choice over everything else.

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 14, 2015 at 12:19 pm #

            To be fair, I don’t think Skarlet knows what OBPI stands for and if she does, she is pretty sure that her midwife would have the skills and equipment to treat it at home,

        • Sarah
          November 10, 2015 at 6:57 am #

          You tell us what they are, then.

      • Anna
        November 10, 2015 at 3:37 am #

        Oh, it’s just a legal way of being a Nazi these days. Implying that women who can’t birth without complications aren’t good enough to live and neither are their babies. Who cares for these miserable wrecks who are going to die or be badly injured in homebirth? Obviously their genes aren’t good enough to be passed on anyway. That’s the bottom line of the NCB movement.

    • Roadstergal
      November 9, 2015 at 5:16 pm #

      Since you’re so familiar with C-section rates, can you tell us the perinatal mortality and incidence of ischemic brain injury for each birth setting?

      Oregon is a good place to start with the former – they had a homebirth midwife collect mortality data for babies with planned homebirth vs planned hospital birth.

      Also, can you elaborate on the ‘stuff’ they hook you up to at the hospital, and why they do it?

      • Skarlet Pike
        November 9, 2015 at 5:53 pm #

        Have you read Hillary’s post? Her comment should be above my original comment.

        • Roadstergal
          November 9, 2015 at 6:13 pm #

          Her post does not address any of the questions I asked.

    • demodocus
      November 9, 2015 at 5:37 pm #

      Didn’t want food, didn’t feel like walking around, didn’t have a cesearian, volunteered in a hospital often enough that it wasn’t that weird for me. Only thing I minded was the IV, but since I went into pre-eclampsia, it was kind of necessary.

      • Skarlet Pike
        November 9, 2015 at 5:51 pm #

        I’m glad that setting worked well for you!!! I’m sorry to hear about the pre-eclampsia, but glad that it all ended up well. How old is your little one? 🙂

      • Bugsy
        November 9, 2015 at 8:43 pm #

        I had an IV, too – mine was for GBS (and also for Gravol). Necessary, and I kinda forgot it was there after a while.

        • demodocus
          November 9, 2015 at 10:23 pm #

          It was put in for the strep, but the bp was more dramatic. Plus, it’s why the damn thing stayed in for 24 hours after labor for the magnesium.

          • Bugsy
            November 10, 2015 at 11:13 am #

            Eeck. Really glad to hear that everything went okay w/ it.

          • demodocus
            November 10, 2015 at 1:15 pm #

            yeah. Me too.

        • Roadstergal
          November 10, 2015 at 11:40 am #

          Honestly, I like IVs. I like that cool, soothing rush of saline. Not that I go out looking for them, but in the specific situations of needing health care, they’re quite pleasing. I’m sure if I were in a situation where I was puking, I’d like them even more…!

          • Bugsy
            November 10, 2015 at 2:24 pm #

            Oh, the Gravol was absolutely awesome…definitely recommend it!

    • Julia Childress
      November 9, 2015 at 5:47 pm #

      A midwifery center affiliated with a hospital is a good compromise. A Certified Nurse Midwife oversees the delivery. The mom can eat, drink, walk around, shower, sit in the tub, watch TV and not be hooked up to anything. Yet the hospital is literally right down the hall and through a door if anything goes awry. Home birth with an unqualified midwife (like Jill Duggar) puts a baby in jeopardy, a baby who has no say-so in the matter. It’s just downright selfish. A baby who has been growing and healthy for 9 months, and who should be safely delivered to live a long and happy life should not be permanently damaged or killed because of the mother’s selfish insistence on home birth, or even worse, her religious extremism (in the case of the Duggars).

      • Skarlet Pike
        November 9, 2015 at 9:37 pm #

        Hmmm… giving birth with no meds is selfish? Cus people go through pain just for fun, in your view?

        Like, I can understand your line of thought when you say that you think home birthing is dangerous. There is an argument that can be made for that. And I agree with you when you say that an unqualified midwife is an unwise and unsafe decision.

        But the selfish bit doesn’t make any sense. These are mothers who care for their babies and want the healthiest option for the baby, and are wiling to go through excruciating pain. That’s not a spoiled wimp. Have you ever given birth? If so, I’m not sure how you can imagine no-med birth to be selfish.

        • Michele
          November 9, 2015 at 9:51 pm #

          She didn’t say that no-med birth is selfish. She said that home birth with an unqualified midwife puts a baby in jeopardy and *that* is selfish.

        • Julia Childress
          November 10, 2015 at 8:05 am #

          Nowhere in my post did I mention med-free birth. I had two epidural births and one med-free birth, all in a hospital setting. The point of my post is my opinion that it’s selfish to put a baby at risk because I want a particular type of birth experience, or to sacrifice the life or health of a baby on the altar of my religious ideology. Many patriarchy/quiverfull adherents are now rejecting doctors in favor of uneducated midwives. Don’t forget that Michelle had a female OB named Dr. Sarver who delivered some of her babies, yet it’s doubtful that Jill or Jessa saw an actual doctor at all during their pregnancies. A doctor might have told them that they were expecting large babies and recommended against home birth. Some followers of the quiverfull/patriarchy dogma are now even rejecting midwives and the husband and wife deliver the baby together. These are dangerous trends. Until the last 100 years or so, childbirth complication was a leading cause of death for women. That is no longer the case in the west because of the availability of trained medical professionals and hospitals. Yes, I believe it’s selfish to put a baby at risk because my religion tells me to reject “godless” science and secular institutions.

        • Wren
          November 10, 2015 at 8:47 am #

          Did you actually read the comment you are replying to?

    • the wingless one
      November 9, 2015 at 6:13 pm #

      Do you also have a crystal ball? Because that’s the only way to safely use a hospital as a backup option in case of emergency.

    • the wingless one
      November 9, 2015 at 6:17 pm #

      Oh and my c-section was 100% necessary, so how does that affect your percentages hm?

      • Skarlet Pike
        November 9, 2015 at 9:42 pm #

        Have you studied the topic?

        I would recommend reading these (and more):


        If yours was necessary, then I’m super glad that you got one! 🙂 Very supportive.

        The percentage being too high means that a lot of women who don’t need C-sections are getting them, due to the poor decision making or incompetence of doctors (that can cause the need for a C-section where there wasn’t one previously). It’s those women who are getting the short end of the stick.

        • The Bofa on the Sofa
          November 9, 2015 at 9:51 pm #

          How do you determine that someone who had a c-section did not need it? For any specific person, how can you know they didn’t need a c-section?

          Hint: don’t bother trying – it is not possible

        • the wingless one
          November 9, 2015 at 10:32 pm #

          Do you have a crystal ball that tells you which women need it and which ones don’t? Doctors try to minimize risk, people like you want to take risks and have the doctors clean up the mess for you when predictable catastrophes occur. I don’t need google university, I have doctors who actually went to med school, did residencies and have devoted their lives to women’s health.

        • Monkey Professor for a Head
          November 9, 2015 at 10:58 pm #

          Lets look at a hypothetical example. Say 100 women have a medical condition that means that 10% of their babies will die during vaginal birth. C section greatly reduces that risk. There is no way of knowing in advance which babies will die. If those 100 women deliver by c section, does that mean that 90 of those c sections were unnecessary? Would the death of 10 babies be worth avoiding 100 c sections? Where should we draw the line?

    • swbarnes2
      November 9, 2015 at 6:52 pm #

      No, hospitals don’t treat routine births as emergencies, they treat them as potential emergencies. EVERY women runs the risk of being in a situation where they baby is 5 minutes away from being severely hurt for “natural” reasons. Therefore, the reasonable, responsible thing to do when labor gets far enough along is to be within 5 minutes of medical help. The Duggars chose to be much farther than that. So do other homebirthing women, and the results can be tragic.

    • mythsayer
      November 9, 2015 at 7:14 pm #

      1) You have no proof that the C-Section rate is too high. There’s no evidence as to what a good rate really is.
      2) WHO CARES how high the C-Section rate is? So C-Sections carry some risks? SO DO HOME BIRTHS. You don’t want a C-Section? REFUSE ONE. JUST REFUSE. The baby might die, but if you feel that strongly about it, then JUST DO NOT AGREE TO ONE. They can’t force anyone to agree. Oh? Doctors are scaring people? Well damn those doctors for wanting to make SURE the baby and mom are okay. HOW EVIL! Jesus… there are more important things in the world than the C-Section rate.
      3) Some of us LIKE C-Sections. I asked for one. OMG! I’m SUCH A BAD MOTHER! I must not love my daughter right? Do you realize how hypocritical that viewpoint is? If you can choose a home birth, then the rest of us can choose a C-Section. Both choices have risks. You don’t like C-Sections. I don’t like home birth.

      The fact that you’ve seen two good home births means nothing. The MANA statistics themselves show that home birth is far, far riskier. So an increase of a small number is still small? You know what? If it was your baby who died, you wouldn’t feel that way, I hope.

      If a hospital death rate is 1/1000 and the home birth rate is 4/1000 (I am making these numbers up because they are easy to work with), then that seems like a small increase. Only 3 more per 1000.

      But when you get to 100,000… it makes a difference.

      Then it’s 10/100,000. Only 10 for the hospital in my scenario.

      But it’s 30/100,000 for home birth. That’s 20 more babies.TWENTY MORE.

      And these aren’t congenital problems. The MANA numbers remove those types of issues. When you compare low risk hospital births to low risk home births, you find that even MANA admits that home birth is about 4 times more risky. That adds up to a small amount overall… but still too many dead and damaged babies who could have been saved.

      And if you refuse to believe MANA’s numbers, then nothing is going to convince you.

      • Skarlet Pike
        November 9, 2015 at 9:53 pm #

        No, I’ve read the studies and done research. Maybe when I have some more time I can type up stuff for you, but for now I only have time to reply to this part:

        “They can’t force anyone to agree. Oh? Doctors are scaring people? Well damn those doctors for wanting to make SURE the baby and mom are okay. HOW EVIL! Jesus… there are more important things in the world than the C-Section rate.3) Some of us LIKE C-Sections. I asked for one. OMG! I’m SUCH A BAD MOTHER! I must not love my daughter right? ”

        Yes, they do force people. I know people who have said “no” to things and then the doctors did it anyway. I personally know people to whom that has happened.

        But more importantly, why are you yelling at me?

        I never said you are a bad mother. Yet, because I had a home birth, you are treating me like I’m the enemy somehow? Using sarcasm and yelling and stuff. Look, I think we are both moms who care about their child, and want to do what’s best. Why can’t we be supportive of each other?

        • FEDUP MD
          November 10, 2015 at 4:02 pm #

          You do realize that you are describing multiple cases not only of malpractice, but of actual assault? Like, you should be calling the police type assault? Any medical procedure performed upon you without consent is assault, unless there is a court order or you are incompetent for one reason or another (including being unable to respond during a medical emergency).And you know of all of these cases, yet not only did no one sue, no one called the police? Or even the medical board of your state?

          Because no one on the Internet has ever lied or exaggerated. I call you to encourage these women to complain to their state medical boards, as well as file a malpractice claim and call the police, if still within the statute of limitations. Otherwise it’s really hard to believe.

      • Anna
        November 10, 2015 at 3:26 am #

        “There are more important things in the world than the C-Section rate”. Not a fan of c-sections myself, but couldn’t agree more. There’s just one question that homebirthers ALWAYS fail to answer and that is if birth is so safe why has it taken so many lifes throughout history? Another thing they ALWAYS fail to do is realize that life is not a box of candies and unpleasant/bad things do happen. One can’t just stamp one’s feet like an angry toddler saying: “But that’s NOT what I want! But I DON’T like hospitals! Baby? Oh, it will have to find it’s way to get out somehow. But I will NOT do anything I dislike”.

    • OBPI Mama
      November 9, 2015 at 8:05 pm #

      Just transfer. Easy peasy. Best of both worlds…. until your baby is hanging half way out of you at home and the midwife is too busy pulling the completely flat baby out of you in time to even think beyond what to do next, let alone call 911. We lost my son’s heartrate while I was pushing… too late to call an ambulance. Transfer is not as easy as it sounds… try holding your breath for 10 minutes and see how it’s the “best of both worlds”. I’m lucky… my son was able to be resc’d and only suffers from a lifelong birth injury instead of being dead. My baby wasn’t blessed with good enough health to be crawling around the house at 9 months old, or 10, or 11… Glad it went well for you, but don’t think for a second it wasn’t anything but luck.

      • Skarlet Pike
        November 10, 2015 at 1:23 am #

        I am very sorry to hear about that situation. 🙁 I’m glad that your son was revived, though. <3 <3

        My general stance that it's okay for women to choose home births, after doing risk assessment, does *not* mean that I think home birth is risk-free. It isn't. Neither is hospital birth, yet I also affirm ladies choices if they want to take meds (which effect the baby), C-sections even when it's unnecessary, and other interventions. Bad stuff happens, yeah, but I affirm that ladies should get to research the risks and choose what they think is their best bet for a healthy birth and infant.

        I'm saying that to clarify that I am not at all trying to downplay the risks, or the sad things that happen. Those are real, and those matter. You're an awesome lady.

        • Sarah
          November 10, 2015 at 6:55 am #

          Why do you think you get to decide if a section is unnecessary?

    • Bugsy
      November 9, 2015 at 8:41 pm #

      An opposing anecdote – my hospital births hardly treated my two births as emergencies. Both were uneventful, baby and I were healthy, and we were discharged 1-2 days later.

      I will agree that both times around, the food sucked…but in both cases, we took advantage of having a shopping mall across the street. That being said, bad food wasn’t enough of a reason for me to consider a home birth.

      • Gene
        November 9, 2015 at 8:44 pm #

        The hospital where I had my first two had the most awesome french toast and pesto pizza. When I was pregnant either #2, I was actively looking forward to the awesome breakfasts and lunches and dinners.

        • Bugsy
          November 9, 2015 at 8:48 pm #

          Oooh, you’re so lucky! Here’s a rundown of my conversation w/ food services on Saturday:

          FS: “I need to take your lunch and dinner orders.”
          Me (trying to duck the food): “I’m getting discharged.”
          FS: “We’ll still take the order. For lunch, do you want chicken noodle soup?”
          Me: “Umm, ok.”
          FS: “And orange beef or carrot loaf?” (What’s an orange beef loaf? Yum.)
          Me: “Umm, orange beef?”
          FS: “With mashed potatoes or rice?”
          Me: “Mashed potatoes?”
          FS: “With tomato sauce on top of the potatoes?”
          Me: “Ummm, no?”
          FS: “Fruit salad or egg tart for dessert?”
          Me: “Fruit?”
          My dad: “Did they just ask you if you wanted fruit salad or an eggplant for dessert?”

          I was discharged after lunch. The orange beef smelled like Alpo. Pretty sure the mashed potatoes were never a vegetable product to begin with.

          And it was still better than the purple chicken chow mien that arrived the night prior. My husband got a great picture of that one. 🙁

          • Bombshellrisa
            November 9, 2015 at 10:22 pm #

            Oh that sounds dreadful! You do have some awesome options for take out now that you are home (I am jealous).
            The nurses who took care of me were full of suggestions about what was best on the menu. They kept telling me about the milkshakes and told me to order two. My husband loved the hospital food and if I hadn’t been so cranky I am sure I would have loved it too.

          • Bugsy
            November 10, 2015 at 11:12 am #

            Wow, you had amazing nurses! My nurses’ reaction to the food was pretty much: “avoid it.” 🙂

    • yentavegan
      November 9, 2015 at 8:51 pm #

      I am happy you are your sister both are the beneficiaries of genetic luck of the draw. That is the reason why you had uneventful happy homebirth outcomes. When Mother Nature was handing out genes you got on the good line. Many of us do not process your superior genes. Hospital birth and well timed interventions make us parents today.

      • Skarlet Pike
        November 10, 2015 at 1:26 am #

        Well I wouldn’t call us lucky. Most of the time, home births are uneventful happy events. We are among the majority, in that sense. Yes, it is fortunate that we were.

        But if I were actually lucky, I wouldn’t have had HG and puked so much I lost 20 pounds in the first half of pregnancy alone. No one can call that nightmare lucky…

    • namaste863
      November 10, 2015 at 12:20 am #

      The problem with HB as I see it is that when something does go sideways, one is minutes away from the hospital when seconds count.

      • Roadstergal
        November 10, 2015 at 11:37 am #

        Someone on this board not very long ago mentioned the most seamless transfer she’s ever seen. It still took a half hour. A half hour of your baby not breathing…

  12. Lizzi
    November 9, 2015 at 3:37 pm #

    Both Duggar women received the necessary medical help. They weren’t opposed to the hospital for emergency.
    No need to shame them for attempting to have natural childbirth at home. Every woman has a right to chose the type of birthing experience they feel is right for them.

    • Michele
      November 9, 2015 at 4:03 pm #

      Why is it “shaming” to point out that even in young, healthy, low-risk women, complications can and often do happen?

      How about we fix your last sentence to read: Every woman has a right to chose the type of birthing experience they feel is right for them AFTER RECEIVING ACCURATE INFORMATION ABOUT ALL RISKS INVOLVED IN THEIR CHOSEN BIRTHING EXPERIENCE.

      • Karen
        November 9, 2015 at 4:10 pm #

        The author dramatically states the births almost killed them. When did they almost die? They went to the hospital for help when it became necessary, which was always part of their homebirth plan.

        • Karen in SC
          November 9, 2015 at 4:17 pm #

          Why do homebirthers get a claim to hospital resources that they originally rejected? What if once chosen, there was no option to go to the hospital and now use emergency resources.

          What if there was no operating room available when a homebirther came in – due to a serious car crash involving multiple injuries? What if no ambulance was available? (though I am sure TLC had one in the driveway for the Duggars but other homebirths wouldn’t have that)

          In both these cases, a natural birth in the hospital would have been calmer, action taken long before it was an emergency no doubt.

          • swbarnes2
            November 9, 2015 at 4:30 pm #

            I think you mean a “no pain med” birth, since “natural” birth with no obstetric interventions at all might have been deadly.

          • Karen
            November 9, 2015 at 4:48 pm #

            Because women have a right to medical care, so do their unborn babies. A woman who opts to try to have her baby at home is not necessarily rejecting a hospital. Home may be her first preference for many reasons. Making the hospital the second choice is not rejection.

            In the situaiton you describe, I guess the unfortunate is the car crash victim who can’t get immediate attention because a pregnant lady opted to have her baby in the hospital and is now emergency surgery.

          • Amazed
            November 9, 2015 at 5:05 pm #

            No need to weep for the poor crash victim. In most circumstances, hospitals manage to accommodate both women who give birth there and car crash victims. Usually, they manage to accommodate homebirthing princesses as well. Even if they don’t, usually the damage was done far before the natcherel lady came to the dreaded hospital.

            Oh, and you’d better drop the “Making the hospital the second choice is not rejection” line as well. Because it isn’t true. Have you been to homebirth forums? Have you heard homebirthers being interviewd? They all sing the same party line – hospitals are terrible, home is safer. That’s total rejection. Unless someone need saving. At which point doctors get trusted as if they were gods. Of course, if they don’t manage to avoid the homebirth damage completely, the hospital gets sued for the disaster. Reference: Evelyn Mulholland.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 9, 2015 at 5:09 pm #

            I didn’t go the hospital to get dental work done. However, if dental work goes awry, a person can get transferred to a hospital. I’ve heard of it happening.

            We don’t live at the hospital. We only go there if we get hurt, get sick, or need help.

            How, then, it is wrong (in your view) to treat a hospital as a place that not a first option but rather a back-up options for if you get hurt or need help?

            Isn’t that the *purpose* of a hospital?

          • Who?
            November 9, 2015 at 5:12 pm #

            Difference is, there is only one patient with dental work. Assuming you care about a living baby with an intact brain, more than you care about your experience, there are two patients in a birth.

            But then, ‘most’ go fine, right? And the ones that don’t, just too bad? Unless those doctors and hospitals you don’t trust can fix it for you?


          • Amazed
            November 9, 2015 at 5:13 pm #

            Well, I think that two or three days in a hospital to ensure that my baby has the best chances to survive and start their live undamaged and with a living and healthy mother are not “living at the hospital”. But I guess that’s too much for a homebirthing princess. Too great a sacrifice.

            Silly me, I thought the *purpose* of a mother was to ensure that her baby has the best chance to preserve life and brain function. Clearly not. Mommy being busy to show how “educated” she is trumps it every day of the week and ten on Sunday.

            Your privilege is showing.

          • Roadstergal
            November 9, 2015 at 5:23 pm #

            The risks matter. The higher the risk, the greater the chance that a non-emergency if handled immediately at a hospital will turn into an emergency if away from hospital resources. That’s the reason I get dental work done at a dentist*, while I get outpatient non-GA surgery done at a hospital. What are the chances (numeric odds, please) of something going wrong enough to require a hospital with dental work vs childbirth?

            *Which is already a controlled environment with resources and experts available that I don’t have at home.

          • Who?
            November 9, 2015 at 5:26 pm #

            But would you embark on dental work at home? Even an exam? If not, why not? No equipment, no expertise, wouldn’t know what you were looking at?

            That’s exactly why many people think home birth is ridiculous. Except at homebirth there is a tiny person that you conjured up, who gets no say in your decision, and who might die or be permanently damaged because what is needed to help them isn’t there.

          • mythsayer
            November 9, 2015 at 7:26 pm #

            NO but you go to a DENTIST, who went to a version of medical school and who has INSURANCE for when things go wrong. You don’t call in a lay dentist to pull your wisdom teeth at home with natural pain relief. THAT is the correct analogy.

          • MaeveClifford
            November 10, 2015 at 3:52 pm #

            So *you’ve* never had a dental procedure that was dangerous enough to warrant being performed at the hospital. Probably because most dental procedures are far less dangerous than childbirth (lower statistical morbidity and mortality).

            Part of the rubric for deciding whether a medical procedure should be done in a hospital or a doctor’s office, is how badly and how quickly could this go down if it does turn into an emergency?

            That’s why when I was six and my maxilla was small, my dentist elected to perform the removal of a supernumerary tooth in the hospital, under general anesthesia. Whereas when I was 12, and I grew another extra tooth in a different place, I had the procedure done in his office, with only nitrous and local. Both went fine. But the first involved a small person and the potential to knick a major artery. If he’d misjudged, there may not have been TIME to get me to the hospital before I bled out.

            Consider how much smaller a patient a neonate is, and how much more fraught the childbirth process is. Emergencies can present suddenly. There’s no time to transfer. The “back-up” works much better if it’s just down the hall than 15-30 min car ride away.

          • Who?
            November 9, 2015 at 5:43 pm #

            Boring rights argument, which, as usual, carefully carves away the responsibility side of the story.

          • the wingless one
            November 9, 2015 at 6:29 pm #

            A pregnant woman giving birth in the hospital would be having her emergency surgery in L&D not in the ER. At least at the hospital where I gave birth a pregnant woman cannot take resources away from a car crash victim (it’s a completely separate facility). A self, spoiled homebirth mother could take resources away from another mother who had chosen all along to give birth at the hospital though. None of your comments have made any sense.

          • Tiffany Aching
            November 9, 2015 at 7:41 pm #

            Just for a second, can you imagine how stressful it is for the medical staff to have to save a woman who is bleeding to death / a baby who is stuck and can die or be brain-damaged for lack of oxygen ? Do you understand that they might be a little pissed, knowing that theses situations would have been avoided, or at least been much easier to manage, if the mother didn’t think that being able to eat and being in a kiddie pool in her living room was so very important ? Transfer time turns a manageable complication into a life and death situation.

          • Tiffany Aching
            November 9, 2015 at 7:47 pm #

            In other words, if somebody rejected all my professional advice, made the situation much worse and more complicated, and then said “hey, I made a mess, come help me !”, I would probably tell him/her to bite me. Fortunately, I am not a doctor.

          • Tiffany Aching
            November 9, 2015 at 7:42 pm #


        • Amazed
          November 9, 2015 at 4:26 pm #

          Yeah. Pity thay too many hospitals aren’t aware that they’re part of some spoiled natcherel princesses’ homebirth plans. They only get to know when the pumpkin parks there to drop the ongoing disaster in their lap.

          They wouldn’t have gone to the hospital if they weren’t afraid that they or their babies were going to die.

          Personally, if there weren’t tiny innocent lives involved, I would have been just fine with homebirthing princesses taking the responsibility they screech for. All the responsibility. Without the safety net they badmouth but expect to be there to hold them when Their Highnesses and their incompetent providers demand it.

          Personally, I’d feel uncomfortable if I say bad things about the studio where I get my hair done, proclaim them greedy and whatnot, declare that they’re only in to take my money, that I know my hair best and that’s why I’ll trust a hobbyist to dye my hair with strong professional products… all the while expecting that when they damage it, my hairdresser will be there, dropping everything else and everyone else (there was this smug thing at mothering dot com who boasted that when the hospital got informed that she’d be coming, she’d get to bump another emergency as they waited for her) before I get bald.

          • Skarlet Pike
            November 9, 2015 at 5:07 pm #

            What makes you think that giving birth at home is being spoiled? Have you ever gone through the process? So few people call excruciating pain “being spoiled.” What an odd perspective.

          • Amazed
            November 9, 2015 at 5:10 pm #

            Many things make me think the vast majority of homebirthers are spoiled and entitled. But I’m less interested in explaining my reasoning to you than I am in telling you that the rate of all C-sections is a totally fabricated and misleading way to look at an individual woman’s chances to get one in the hospital. And your lie that c-section and “interventioned” babies are less healthy because of the c-sections and the interventions tells me all I need to know about you.

          • RMY
            November 9, 2015 at 6:09 pm #

            I’ve had friends who’ve wanted to have home births despite the increased risk because they’d be “more comfortable” at home. Risking an innocent life for your own comfort may seem to some to be spoiled. To me it suggests just a really bad understanding of risks. But I tend to assume the best in people.

          • the wingless one
            November 9, 2015 at 6:26 pm #

            What does (pointlessly) choosing to go through “excruciating pain” have to do with being spoiled? I don’t get why you presume these things to be mutually exclusive. Very odd.

        • Azuran
          November 9, 2015 at 4:35 pm #

          Jessa could have bled out and died before the ambulance made it to her home or during the transfer to the hospital.

        • EllenL
          November 9, 2015 at 5:40 pm #

          Last December in Texas, a mother died as a
          result of homebirth in a similar situation. She hemorrhaged and was taken to the hospital “for help when it became necessary.” She died two days
          later, leaving 4 motherless children (including a baby injured at the homebirth).

          It’s not melodramatic – it’s factual – to state that homebirth kills and homebirth injures.

          What are the chances of that happening? I bet that
          mother thought they were zero. In any case, they are higher than planning and having a baby in the hospital.

    • EllenL
      November 9, 2015 at 4:14 pm #

      I don’t think of this as a shaming opportunity so much as a learning one.
      What do we learn from this? For one thing, homebirth isn’t as successful as women are led to believe (by midwives). Even in countries that fully support homebirth (for low risk women) the transfer rate to hospital is around 40% for first time mothers. Women need to know this. It would make them more realistic in their expectations, if nothing else.

      There’s also the issue that prompt intervention – available when you’re already in the hospital – is more likely to produce a healthy result, and with less pain and trauma.

      And there’s the fact that homebirth IS riskier than hospital birth, for both babies and mothers. The risks of injury or death are higher at homebirth. That truth needs to be spoken and understood.

      With all of that in mind, yes, women have the right to choose where they birth. It’s an illusion, however, to think they have the ability to choose the kind of birth experience they want; that’s largely up to chance – and a lot of other factors they have no control over.

    • mostlyclueless
      November 9, 2015 at 4:29 pm #

      They have the right to choose their preferred birthing experience, and I have the right to think they’re selfish and stupid for choosing a fun birth experience over a safe one.

      • Unah
        November 9, 2015 at 6:00 pm #

        Natural childbirth is anything but a “fun birth experience.” People get caught up in this stuff, and they don’t know who to trust, and the Duggars aren’t exactly known for being rational. I got caught up in the whole thing too when I was pregnant with my first. Although, I had always planned on having a hospital birth, I wanted a natural birth. After being in labor for 20 hours at home, I got to the hospital and decided I had experienced enough natural childbirth.

        • mythsayer
          November 9, 2015 at 7:18 pm #

          I agree. Home birth sounds like torture to me.

  13. Guest
    November 9, 2015 at 3:00 pm #

    I had all 6 of my children in a hospital, happily so. But I think women choose homebirths because they are afraid their doctor will happily and quickly perform a cesearean for profit.

    • Daleth
      November 9, 2015 at 3:05 pm #

      The sad thing is, they’re wrong. Most OBs these days are hospital employees, which means they’re on a salary–it makes no difference to them financially which way you deliver. I had to fight my doctors to get the c-section I wanted, even though I was carrying twins.

      • seekingbalance
        November 10, 2015 at 1:43 am #

        as a physician, I can confirm that. I don’t get paid any differently based on the delivery that a given patient experiences. I get paid for spending my time offering expertise and being my patients’ advocates in the system. no tips, no overtime, no influence to my pay other than the amount I’ve agreed in advance to be paid through my contract. I want each family to experience the birth they hope for, with a safe and healthy baby and mom on the other side. but I also want each family to feel that they were treated well and listened to through the process, since something almost always goes quite differently than planned! and I personally have no doctor friends who play golf. (so if that’s true of all the doctors that I know and work with, it must be true! [nb: homebirth-style logic])

        • Daleth
          November 10, 2015 at 1:04 pm #

          Glad to hear the confirmation. Hey, is it true that OBs are paid a fixed amount for prenatal care and delivery by the woman’s insurance? In other words, you get $X regardless of how she delivers, and the only reason c-sections are more expensive is because the insurance also has to pay the anesthesiologist, pay the hospital for use of the OR, etc.?

          • seekingbalance
            November 10, 2015 at 5:44 pm #

            well, like so many things in healthcare, it’s complicated. many clinics (including mine) operate under the global maternity care billing concept. if you have a simple, uncomplicated pregnancy, with just routine visits and services, your cost is a predetermined amount, which can be known to you ahead of time. if you develop complications, you’ll need or want extra services (such as extra visits for preeclampsia monitoring, extra US for suspected breech position close to term, detailed genetic testing, etc)–even during the pregnancy. similarly, during delivery, there may be extra charges due to what a given women needs and chooses. there’s a cost for an epidural, there’s a cost for OR time (whether for extraction of a retained placenta or for forceps delivery with a double setup in the OR (ie, vaginal birth but ready to convert at a moment’s notice to cesarean birth), or for a cesarean), and, yes, there’s a cost for surgical interventions, including cesareans themselves. how much of this bill you actually see depends on your clinic’s policies and, much more so, your insurance coverage. the fees charged do get distributed to different providers, depending on what role they play in pregnancy and delivery care. I know that I personally don’t get paid any more or less based on what happens with a given woman. never have, in the three settings in which I’ve practiced. that said, I’ve always been salaried or hourly. of course, some of the physicians involved do get paid per procedure–but I can also tell you that a typical amount extra charged for the cesarean alone (the procedure–not counting the OR time, anesthesia, etc–which doesn’t go to her anyway) is commonly on the order of a few hundred dollars, not thousands. I can vouch that no one that I work with would change a woman’s mode of delivery based on the financial incentive of a (relatively speaking) small amount of money that would then be distributed among partners, used for clinic expenses, etc. that’s just not the ethos where I practice, though I can’t vouch for all. and I can certainly tell you that catching a baby at a normal, uncomplicated vaginal birth (and maybe throwing a few stitches in afterwards) is immensely easier that performing a cesarean. and it’s also easier to only have to round on that family once or twice before they’re discharged rather than twice a day for 3-4 days. and it’s especially much easier to deliver her second baby vaginally too than to deliver her second baby by repeat cesarean with scar tissue and adhesions. hope that helps give you a sense of my perspective at least! 🙂

    • SporkParade
      November 9, 2015 at 3:20 pm #

      I think it’s fear in general driving natural childbirth. For people who trust birth, they sure do talk a lot about how birth isn’t scary.

      • The Computer Ate My Nym
        November 10, 2015 at 9:36 am #

        It’s fear being driven by those who profit from it. The NCB industry spends a lot of money trying to scare women into going to them rather than OBs. They have to: Big naturopathy has literally nothing to offer. No effective treatments, no true individualization of therapy, not even really any nicer providers. So they have to scare women into coming to them with stories about how evil doctors are.

    • Lizz
      November 9, 2015 at 3:20 pm #

      I remember seeing those fears expressed during my doula training. I understand why people might think that(one major possibility being they’ve seen the business of being born but I digress). I feel for them and do my best to educate just like everybody else on here who deals a lot with pregnant women. I second what Daleth said about having to fight for their c-section. I requested a repeat c-section after finding out my daughter was IUGR, it was hell trying to get one.

    • Who?
      November 9, 2015 at 4:58 pm #

      That’s an irrational fear, like fearing you’ll be trampled by unicorns. Adults can learn to manage their irrational fear and make good choices.

      • Guest
        November 9, 2015 at 6:57 pm #

        It’s a fear based on the stories many women have shared. Two hours!!! Time’s up! Now off to T time!

        • Who?
          November 9, 2015 at 7:05 pm #

          Sure-but even if that ever happens, and I’ve been around women giving birth for the last 25 years and I’ve never heard that said-why assume it’s for a trivial reason?

          The numbers tell us babies die if pregnancy or labour goes on too long. The numbers also tell us that you can’t foresee when a certain risk-say breech-will turn out okay, and when it will turn out badly. If it was me, I’d have the cs, because I want a healthy baby more than another natural vaginal delivery; others make a different choice, hopefully understanding the risks.

        • Fallow
          November 10, 2015 at 9:08 am #

          Four OBs attended my birth at 12:30 am after allowing me to labor for 35 hours. Trying to avoid a c-section due to my creeping HELLP syndrome causin worries of excessive bleeding from surgery. I live near many golf courses, but i can’t figure it. How were they all going to get to their golf game after midnight, in a snowstorm? I’ve been assured by countless idiots that they surely were hurrying my birth for their own sale when they induced me, rather than trying to save my life. So i know golf must have been on their minds, but they were all still at the hospital 12 goddmned hours later checking on my postpartum state. WHAT A CONUNDRUM.

        • The Computer Ate My Nym
          November 10, 2015 at 9:33 am #

          I have never in my life heard a woman tell a story like that. However, I do know several women whose labors went bad at about 2 hours in and had emergent c-sections to avoid little inconveniences like death. Also, your story is drifting. First it was “for profit”. I guess you realized that that one wasn’t going to go over well on a board full of people who knew and would point out that OBs in the US at least get paid the same for an uncomplicated delivery versus a complicated one and thus have a financial incentive to AVOID c-sections because it means more work and cost for no more pay. But the nebulous evil doctor who wants to make tee time, that’s unprovable so what you went with instead. Good choice. How much does fearmongering pay, anyway?

          • Guest
            November 10, 2015 at 4:11 pm #

            ok angry commenter, I was just echoing thoughts that I have heard other women state in the past. I don’t think doctors are evil and had my children in the hospital. I trusted my doctor and drove an hour to see her even though there is a hospital 5 mins from my house. I happily would have had a section if needed. Why the snotty tone?

    • Sarah
      November 10, 2015 at 7:06 am #

      What, even women who choose homebirth in countries with socialised systems where the section might end up costing more?

      • Wren
        November 10, 2015 at 8:44 am #

        Ah, the rest of the world doesn’t count.

  14. Andi Hutchence
    November 9, 2015 at 11:31 am #

    Although it isn’t a choice I have/would make, I do think it is possible to have a positive, healthy home birth experience. However, it is important to trust common sense and expertise more than it is to merely “trust birth”. I agree that both Jill & Jessa were foolish, which would be fine if it was only their lives at stake. They have been taught so much rhetoric and so few critical thinking skills, they are ill equipt for adult decision making. If that fact was ever open to debate, it isn’t any more. They BOTH had frightening child birth experiences by ANYONE’S standards.
    I do find the irony of the Duggar girls suddenly becoming the poster children FOR hospital births – FANTASTIC & HILARIOUS!

    • The Bofa on the Sofa
      November 9, 2015 at 11:51 am #

      I do think it is possible to have a positive, healthy home birth experience.

      Just as it’s possible to have a postive, event free drunken drive home from the bar.

      Actually, you are as or more likely**** to drive home safely from the bar drunk, no accidents, tickets or deaths, than you are to have a non-fatal childbirth (mother or child) in a hospital, much less at home.

      ***The risk of getting a DUI in an 8 mile drive while drunk is about 1/3400, about the same as the perinatal rate of low-risk pregnancy in a hospital.

      • Andi Hutchence
        November 9, 2015 at 1:19 pm #

        Let’s compare apples to time travel, shall we?
        It’s people like the Duggars who make outlandish leaps like this. Don’t insult drunk driving victims by drawing a line to the hazards encountered in home child birth.. Seriously!

        • Roadstergal
          November 9, 2015 at 1:21 pm #

          The numbers are the numbers. Doing X has Y chances of a negative outcome. Why can’t they be compared?

        • mythsayer
          November 9, 2015 at 1:28 pm #

          Home birth victims (the babies) are just as victimized by choices made by someone other than them. Are you saying homebirth is okay because it’s a choice made sober (I assume anyway)? Because both are choices with consequences.

        • The Bofa on the Sofa
          November 9, 2015 at 3:02 pm #

          How is it outlandish? The risks of childbirth are greater than those for drunk driving. This is a fact.

          Nothing I said was incorrect. It is completely possible to drive drunk safely, with no adverse outcome at all. In fact, it is more likely to happen than with childbirth. The point is not that drunk driving is good, it’s that your statement, “It’s possible to have a positive, healthy homebirth experience” is completely meaningless. Sure, it’s possible. Lots of shit can have fine outcomes. Doesn’t mean it’s not shit.

          • Anna
            November 10, 2015 at 4:15 am #

            “How about allowing drunk driving for low risk drives? I. e. short distance, familiar route, clear visibility? And if smth goes wrong you can just quickly drive off to the kerb and call for some sober friends to come pick you up. And if you end up killing smb… So what? Sober drivers do too. Why bother skip cocktails if I live just a couple miles away straight route and there is no fog or heavy rain? Oh, and I am an experienced driver so I know what I’m doing. Putting innocent people at risk? What? They might die anyway. Anyways, I am not going to place smb’s desire for safety on the road above my own comfort and desire to enjoy cocktails then go home in my OWN car. Because I just can’t stand taxis you know. Taxidrivers are evil men, they will make passes at me and then assault me. I know this for sure cause it happened to my friend.” I am sure 100% of homebirthers would condemn this sort of attitude saying this person is insane and should be banned from driving altogether. But how are they any different? Except that it’s not just some unknown person’s safety that’s in question but that of their own child.

      • Mariana Baca
        November 9, 2015 at 2:12 pm #

        Well, the difference is that people rarely drive drunk “just this once”, while the average number of births a woman has is usually limited to around 2-3 in the US. Expected values do add up over time.

        Not saying either behavior is safe, but one needs to apply frequency of a given event to determine overall safety and impact on others.

        • The Bofa on the Sofa
          November 9, 2015 at 3:08 pm #

          Well, the difference is that people rarely drive drunk “just this once”, while the average number of births a woman has is usually limited to around 2.

          Oh, I’ve said it many times. The problem with drunk driving is not the risk, it’s the prevalence. If drunk driving were as rare as homebith, it wouldn’t be an issue.

          The USDOT estimates there are 27000 miles driven drunk for every DUI. There are a million DUIs in the US each year. Do the math. 27 BILLLION miles a year. For a driving population of about 200 million, that means and average of 135 miles a year driven drunk. If the average length of a drunken drive is 8 miles, that means 17 times a year, on average. If 9/10 people never drink and drive (likely an underestimate), that means those that do drink and drive are doing it like 150 times, and more than 1000 miles a year drunk. And most of them don’t get DUIs, or accidents, or cause any deaths.

          THAT’S the problem.

  15. Dr Kitty
    November 9, 2015 at 9:00 am #

    OT: If you get the chance, read “How I Lost My Vagina” on the Huffington Post site. It is an extremely blunt piece about childbirth related pelvic floor trauma.

    Anyway, when it comes to birth attendants, the appropriate aphorism is “a smooth sea never made a good sailor”.
    Who cares if you are an expert in “normal birth” if you can’t do anything to recognise or manage the abnormal births?

    • LizzieSt
      November 9, 2015 at 11:10 am #

      Damn. That poor woman. This is the fourth birth horror story from the UK that I’ve read in the last few days. Who are these deeply irresponsible people who believe that a vaginal birth is more important than the life and health of a woman? These people who shrug at the misery and sometimes even death they leave in their wake? “Oh yes it’s so sad that your wife bled to death etc. but she had a beautiful home birth so everything’s hunky dory, right?”

      Who are these people? And how can we minimize the damage they do? Maybe more stories like this will lead to a change. One can hope.

    • Gatita
      November 9, 2015 at 3:29 pm #

      Just read it and I’m traumatized. Why in the holy hell did they disregard the original birth plan? And it sounds like she’s maybe not in the best shape mentally and emotionally to raise a child. Just a horror show all around.

      • Dr Kitty
        November 9, 2015 at 6:01 pm #

        IME it is rare for maternity services to decide at 12 weeks on an elective CS at 38weeks and then disregard that plan entirely without reason. I totally understand not putting every detail of your medical history on the Internet, but I have a hard time understanding why the planned CS at 38 weeks was abandoned. As written, it reads like possible negligent malpractice, with reasonable grounds for litigation, but there may be more to it than that (or just Dr#1 not communicating properly with Dr#2 about the reasons for the initial plan).

        I actually think it appears that she’s doing a great job of overcoming fairly awful circumstances in order to parent to the best of her ability.

  16. The Computer Ate My Nym
    November 9, 2015 at 4:36 am #

    I’m sorry. I’m in a crappy mood for unrelated reasons and probably shouldn’t be writing this, but…I don’t feel sorry for Jessa. She is an adult. It’s true that she was exposed to the most seriously evil upbringing this side of the Taliban, but she’s a TV star. It’s not like she hasn’t had the opportunity to hear about other ways of life. Instead she has chosen to risk her life and continue the trauma on to next generation. People can and do break away from fundamentalist cults. The Duggar girls have chosen to profit from propagating it. They can deal with the consequences.

    • demodocus
      November 9, 2015 at 8:46 am #

      I can see that, but for me, I do feel a little bad for her. Some of us take a while to learn how to rebel just by nature, even in families where we’re encouraged to have critical thinking skills. She’s what? 22/23? That’s about when my husband hit his adolescent rebellion.

      • The Computer Ate My Nym
        November 9, 2015 at 9:08 am #

        True. And the kids these days do seem to be having their adolescent rebellions later in life. I’m hoping that some Duggar, preferably soon, will set an example of how to rebel and the rest will follow. I really don’t see that the girls are getting anything out of it. The boys, well, they’re getting power over the girls in exchange for losing half their humanity, but many people seem to think that a good trade.

    • MaineJen
      November 9, 2015 at 10:49 am #

      I agree…whether it’s Jill and Jessa or TLC that are the primary drivers, they do seem to be cynically propagating the family business here. They are now adults and free to break away, get their own education if they want, and start new lives. Instead they’re doubling down, grasping at reality TV because it’s all they know how to do and it’s the path of least resistance. No sympathy here.

      • swbarnes2
        November 9, 2015 at 1:31 pm #

        Get educations? With what money? These girls have been carefully trained NOT to possess the freedom of judgement that breaking away would require. They have husbands who likely are just as gung-ho about the lifestyle as the Duggars, and they know virtually no one outside the community. Remember how these girls are basically assigned to raise a sibling? They might be cut-off from the kid they practically raised if they rebel.

    • Angharad
      November 9, 2015 at 10:57 am #

      I see your point, and I do agree that people can and should break away from cults, but to me it’s almost like an abusive relationship. Yes, women and their families are better off if they can leave, but not everyone can without support. I don’t think any of the Duggars have that outside support.

      • Maya Markova
        November 9, 2015 at 11:44 am #

        I’ve just found an interesting post saying:
        “…I grew up in a family very much like the Duggars. We had a third fewer kids and we didn’t have a TV show, but otherwise it was about the same. Our beliefs were nearly identical to theirs, as was our way of living. When I look at the older Duggar girls, I see myself. I was them…”

        The author doesn’t specify how she has broken free, but she evidently has.

    • AirPlant
      November 9, 2015 at 12:41 pm #

      It is so hard to know what to feel about them. Like I know they are indoctrinated and never really had a chance to be anything but what they are and they are just so so young so I want to say that you can’t blame them for perpetuating the crazy, but then a part of me remembers Jessa’s smug face when she spews this garbage and I just want to throw my hands up and let her ride into the sunset with the consequences of her choices. I mean, it isn’t like she would ever cut me the benefit of the doubt, why should I be kind to her?

    • Julia Childress
      November 9, 2015 at 3:50 pm #

      It is extremely difficult to break out of this lifestyle. I am 60ish and was raised in extreme fundamentalism. The critical difference between the Duggars and my family is that we were raised before homeschooling became the rage in fundy families, so we were exposed to more diverse people and we actually read some secular books as required for school. With homeschooling, the parents can control virtually every aspect of a child’s life. No radio, no TV, no legitimate newspapers, magazines or secular books. They have no friends that aren’t from their cult. They are not allowed to leave the house without their accountability partner. I’m sure the offspring do not have control over any money, nor do they have their own cell phone plans or a vehicle in their names. The married ones may have these things, but only after marriage. If they leave, where do they go? Everyone in their circle would either shun them or tell them to return home and beg their parents for forgiveness. They would have to start a new life with the help of strangers and they would certainly be cut off from the younger children. They have no education, no job skills, and since they are expected to marry and start reproducing at a young age, they are then saddled with kids to take care of. They may be physically adults, but it’s just not that easy to make the choice to leave. My siblings and I were able to get out when the older boys decided to leave. We are all scarred for life and have spent many years trying to heal relationships that were shattered by our upbringing and subsequent rejection of the life we had known.

      • The Computer Ate My Nym
        November 10, 2015 at 9:42 am #

        I’m sorry you went through that! Also sorry about my empathy fail yesterday. As I said, I was upset for unrelated reasons…not that that’s an excuse.

        I don’t understand how this sort of thing doesn’t come under the category of “child abuse”? Why hasn’t CPS come and taken the younger Duggars away? They have video evidence that the Duggars are maltreating them. As for the now young adult children, I don’t see how keeping them from accessing the outside world and doing what they want is anything short of slavery. In short, how does Jim Bob avoid prison? It’s clearly where he belongs.

        • Julia Childress
          November 10, 2015 at 11:16 am #

          No problem – I don’t think it was an empathy fail. It’s just hard for people who were raised in the mainstream of culture to know how terribly isolated and controlled many of the patriarchy offspring are. The thing about the adults is this: most of them stay because by the time they reach adulthood, they truly believe it’s the right thing to do. If they have a momentary inclination to break out of the mold, there is a built-in mechanism to suppress those feelings. You share the feeling with your parents (sharing everything with parents is an important part of the indoctrination), then you study the Bible and pray that God will make you content, then you force yourself to be content with your life. If you have the interest, look up the Botkin sisters. They are the poster children for stay-at-home daughters, and their whole life revolves around their adoration of their father. They blog about their lives, and it’s sad and creepy. In fact, there is now something called Botkin Syndrome and it describes the Duggars perfectly. Thanks for your comment.

          • C T
            November 24, 2015 at 2:00 pm #

            I have neighbors like that. Homeschooling, home church meetings, isolated kids (the 16 yr old boy can’t even bike to the convenience store a few blocks away), shunning other children by parental command, happy faces at all times when around parents, skirts for the girls (because skirts are so much more modest…unless the wind blows 😉 ), mom won’t talk to or look at me (just once she smiled and waved from her yard but it was likely only because she had a guest over), and daddy skipping around hand-in-hand with his youngest daughter, who is probably 8 yrs old. Apparently, life revolves around daddy and his dictates until they get married. Is it outright abuse? No, so no one can step in. Is it good child raising? Only if OK with a large degree of ignorance and forced religiosity, which vitiates faith and finds no support in the New Testament they base so much else on.

    • Sarah
      November 10, 2015 at 7:10 am #

      Has she had that opportunity though? I know she’s on TV, but has she been exposed to anything much else? I imagine the film crew are expected to watch their mouths.

  17. JulieDB
    November 9, 2015 at 12:04 am #

    Thank you for this!

  18. Barbara Delaney
    November 9, 2015 at 12:02 am #

    The cameras were rolling during Jessa’s home birth. That was the reason for the home birth. There are two television specials scheduled to air featuring Jessa and Jill. One is scheduled to air next month, it’s rumored to be the birth special, probably to coincide with Christmas programming. Jessa’s ego is just that large. So far 624 companies have agreed not to sponsor the specials. My objection to these programs is that the birth special is essentially an infomercial for home birth. Already there are women on TLC’s Facebook page who are repeating the Gospel according to Jill. They say home birth is not only as safe as a hospital birth, it’s actually safer. They parrot nonsense about Jill being a “fully qualified medical professional”.

    I am so angry that cynical executives at TLC are willing to essentially lure undereducated women into unsafe birth practices in a quest for ratings and dollars. I’m starting to feel very discouraged. Why do people want to be entertained by what is basically a freak show? Do I have any right to lobby potential sponsors if this is part of the bread and circuses that my fellow citizens desire to see? I honestly don’t know anymore.

    • FEDUP MD
      November 9, 2015 at 1:35 am #

      I don’t know that her ego is so large, it’s just that her family barred her from any schooling so she knows this is probably her only way and chance to make any money to last the rest of her life since she sadly has no other skills. Really sad really.

    • mostlyclueless
      November 9, 2015 at 1:26 pm #

      I don’t know how TLC will be able to spin this into an advertisement for home birth instead of a cautionary tale against it. I’ll reserve judgment until the special comes out — you might be right but I’m hoping that it’ll give enough facts that a reasonable person can connect the dots (that their home births weren’t safe and led to both of them being hospitalized).

  19. Amazed
    November 8, 2015 at 10:06 pm #

    I am just coming from Honest Midwife’s Facebook page. This Betsy is quite something. Congrats to all the ladies from here and far away who showed class without letting her drag the conversation deeper into her swamp.

    As to this Deb midwife, I’d say it’s a good thing she only had her homebirth practice for 2 1/2 years. She might be a CNM (if she’s worked in a hospital) but she’s leaning dangerously close to Betsy’s wise-sounding nonsense. Besides, a “thriving” homebirth practice with about 100 births for 2 1/2 years sounds like drinking the koolaid hype for me, CNM or not.

    At the end, it all boils down to the physical and emotional fitness of the mother, just ask Betsy. Guess Jill and Jessa were sadly unprepared.

    Hey, Dr Amy did it four times and came out with flying colours! She should be the model for those folks and now Betsy has confirmed it. Dr Amy, Birth Goddess, for the win!

  20. Julia Childress
    November 8, 2015 at 9:44 pm #

    My grandmothers and great grandmothers would have given anything to have had the birth care that the Duggar women despise.

  21. villadeste
    November 8, 2015 at 8:55 pm #

    Great article. I also wonder how much their attitudes regarding modesty determine their health care choices. I would be surprised if they got regular pap smears or mammograms.

    • Julia Childress
      November 8, 2015 at 9:36 pm #

      It’s partly about the modesty, but more about the extremism of their religion. I mean, I wouldn’t call being surrounded by cameras during labor and birth modest (sister-in-law Anna gave birth on the toilet.) They are threatened by science, secular institutions, the government, and education, all of which you will find involved with the medical community. They could have had a Certified Nurse Midwife-assisted birth at a birthing center that is affiliated with a hospital. Instead, they insist on using ill-equipped and under-educated midwives at home. They are a threat to their children in more ways than one.

      • Dr Kitty
        November 9, 2015 at 8:26 am #

        But if they used CNMs it would suggest that they agree that women should go to university, and work in hospitals.

        CPMs can do all their training in the home, without a university education. CPMs don’t have to spend time around male doctors, professors or fellow students. CPMs can work out of their homes and fit appointments around homeschooling their own children. CPM is considered an appropriate career for a Quiverfull woman, CNM is not. Therefore they have to deny that CNMs are better.

        It is IMPORTANT to Quiverfull followers that they choose CPMs, and that this is projected as a safe choice with a well trained birth attendant.

        Otherwise they would have to admit that not only are they reducing their daughters’ educational options, that the only “career” open to them is dangerous and that they don’t value the lives or health of their women and children enough to care.

        • demodocus
          November 9, 2015 at 8:48 am #

          we don’t need no edumacation to know our BIBLE!
          I know ministers and philosophers with better critical thinking skills.

          • The Computer Ate My Nym
            November 9, 2015 at 9:27 am #

            Well, we could go back to the Medieval plan: Don’t let anyone but the priests read the Bible lest the common folk “misinterpret” it.

          • demodocus
            November 9, 2015 at 11:17 am #

            Basically that’s what the Duggars and their fellow congregants are doing, isn’t it? Letting their loony leader interpret the Bible and not using their brains for much of anything?

        • Julia Childress
          November 9, 2015 at 10:07 am #

          Yes, protecting your children from the evils of a real education is more important than protecting the health and safety of mothers and babies. The patriarchy/quiverfull/homeschool dogmas are truly frightening.

        • Bombshellrisa
          November 9, 2015 at 11:42 am #

          CPMs also don’t prescribe births control, so the Duggars don’t have to worry that their daughters will be taught how to be able to limit “Gods plan” for how many kids they will have

    • MaineJen
      November 9, 2015 at 9:37 am #

      But Mama Duggar always went to the hospital. So…..?

    • Medwife
      November 9, 2015 at 10:39 am #

      Cervical cancer is a whore’s disease and you can pray breast cancer away. Ta da!

  22. Sue
    November 8, 2015 at 7:59 pm #

    Something for radical-NCBers to remember: The outcome of your homebirth relies on the back-up of the conventional medical system – always on standby to rescue ppl from their poor decisions.

  23. Who?
    November 8, 2015 at 7:54 pm #

    Let’s hope this is enough to shake these two young women out of whatever thrall they have been under.

    • Michele
      November 8, 2015 at 9:20 pm #

      Unlikely. They’ve had their beliefs beaten into them their whole lives.

      • Blue Chocobo
        November 8, 2015 at 9:46 pm #

        Their mother sought extensive OB care, though. She was all about whatever medical technology would preserve her chances of further pregnancies. The daughters are just attention whores. Their belief is in their own fame.

        • Julia Childress
          November 8, 2015 at 9:51 pm #

          Their religion is also becoming more extreme, as the first generation born into high-demand Christian fundamentalism reaches adulthood. They keep adding to their list of rules, and eschewing science, education, government involvement and secular institutions is now almost a requirement for a “true” Christian.

        • Michele
          November 8, 2015 at 10:35 pm #

          Didn’t Michelle Duggar have a couple of homebirths herself though? She doesn’t seem to have done much to discourage her daughters or daughter-in-law from having homebirths either.

  24. Anna
    November 8, 2015 at 4:49 pm #

    The new mother (Jessa) only ended up separated from her newborn for a longer time than she would have been had she gone to the hospital in the first place. Actually, had she planned a hosp delivery, she might have been home already. Sometimes we are our own worst enemies. Homebirth is trendy, so go for it, it’s dangerous, hell yeah, but the thing is if you DO succeed you can brag about it like, for the rest of your life. Totally worth it. I DO NOT believe that they do it for some other reason than to be cool and trendy. Skin to skin? I think all hospitals make sure it is an option for those who want it.

    • Amanda Stamps
      November 8, 2015 at 9:44 pm #

      Then you know little about this family. They do it for financial and modesty reasons. That and Michelle Duggar did it, so they want to copy Mom.

      • Azuran
        November 8, 2015 at 9:50 pm #

        Financial reason? Then were reality tv celebrity. They totally can afford hospital birth.

        • Amanda Stamps
          November 8, 2015 at 9:52 pm #

          Hospital births are not cheap and they wouldn’t have the same freedom in terms of filming 🙂 Why deliver somewhere that wouldn’t allow filming, thus cutting your ability to profit from it? lol

        • demodocus
          November 8, 2015 at 11:12 pm #

          Isn’t there a rule were emergency departments can’t turn away a woman in labor?

          • SporkParade
            November 9, 2015 at 10:00 am #

            They may not be able to turn away a woman, but that doesn’t mean the woman can afford the bill.

    • guest
      November 9, 2015 at 9:08 am #

      I had all three of my children in hospital. The first thing the midwife did after delivery was place the baby on my chest. I was holding each one of them while my husband cut the umbilical cord.

      • Bugsy
        November 9, 2015 at 1:20 pm #

        Me, too. My second son was born on Friday; the first time he and I were apart in any context was Saturday morning, when I trotted off to the hospital cafeteria in search of some vaguely edible food. The hospital’s policy was clear-cut that the baby would stay with us in the room the entire time, and he did.

        • guest
          November 9, 2015 at 2:50 pm #

          Doctors and midwives strive to keep babies as close to their mothers as possible these days. Midwives encourage that skin-to-skin contact right after birth, nursing on demand and just relaxing with the baby. It was a busy maternity ward, but they took the time to sit down with me to chat about how I felt, how nursing was going (I chose to nurse), and were ready to answer any questions I may have.

    • The Computer Ate My Nym
      November 9, 2015 at 9:13 am #

      I had a c-section and was never separated from my baby: She was weighed and had apgars taken while I was being sewed up and stayed with me in recovery. I got to cuddle her and breast feed before I could feel my feet again.

      • Dr Kitty
        November 9, 2015 at 10:00 am #

        Likewise. Both kiddos born by CS, six years apart, so these are not brand new policies.

        Over the drape onto my chest, off to the warmer for a quick assessment, back to me for another cuddle, then DH cuddled them for the 10 minutes until I was back in recovery, where I fed them within 30minutes of birth and before we went up to the ward.

  25. ArmyChick
    November 8, 2015 at 4:35 pm #

    Home birth is so safe that my youngest uncle lost his life during one. The difference here is that my grandmother did not have a choice as she lived in a third world country and couldn’t afford to give birth at a hospital.

  26. yentavegan
    November 8, 2015 at 4:30 pm #

    The Duggar sisters would have had perfectly healthy homebirths if they had had the right midwives. I am certain Ina May Gaskin could have delivered those babies without trauma or medical intervention.

    • alex
      November 8, 2015 at 8:26 pm #

      Ina May Gaskin lost a kid herself & had been involved with several deaths. No midwife can be trusted b/c THEY ARE NOT DOCTORS. If they were that smart, they would’ve gone to medical school.

      • Carol Koester Bassett
        November 8, 2015 at 9:15 pm #

        Find me an experienced OB that has not “been involved with several deaths”. It happens, even with all the modern advances on obstetrics. That is not, in and of itself, a marker of a defective education.

        • PrimaryCareDoc
          November 8, 2015 at 9:34 pm #

          Find me an OB that has had several deaths of low-risk term births. That would be equivalent. I’ll bet you can’t.

          OBs take care of the high risk moms and babies. That’s where their deaths come from.

        • Who?
          November 8, 2015 at 9:35 pm #

          When an OB Is involved in a death, it will be investigated, critiqued and lessons learnt. The doctor may be professionally penailsed if he or she has been found to be negligent. The family can sue the doctor or hospital should they wish to do so, and there is an insurance fund available to answer their claim.

          When a birth hobbyist is involved in a death, the mother/family are shunned, the hobbyist is told it wasn’t her fault and some babies aren’t meant to live. There will be no proper notes or records so the events leading up to the death will not be able to be properly investigated, even if (say) law enforcement is involved. And there is no insurance to pursue.

        • Julia Childress
          November 8, 2015 at 9:42 pm #

          Even the most skilled OB in the best hospital will eventually lose a mom or a baby. But when you are in a hospital, critical care is just seconds away. Jessa could have bled to death in the minutes it took for the ambulance to get there. There is no reason to take such a risk. If you want minimal intervention, then use a Certified Nurse Midwife in a birthing center near a hospital. Risking the life of a baby who has been beautifully formed and living healthily in the womb is unconscionable and certainly flies in the face of their supposed “pro-life” stance.

        • The Computer Ate My Nym
          November 9, 2015 at 4:30 am #

          If a low risk woman or baby dies under the care of an OB in a hospital, there is an investigation and, generally, a lawsuit. Often, changes are made to protocol so that something like that does not happen again. If a home birth midwife does the same, they shrug it off as “some babies were not meant to live.” See the difference?

        • Fallow
          November 9, 2015 at 6:43 am #

          Let’s create an over simplified example here. Numbers ahead are pulled out of my butt, but make the point

          You have one birth provider who has, let’s say, a rate of 5 deaths in 100. They have no clue how many hypoxic events have happened to their surviving patients, and are not accountable to document them in the first place.

          Then you have another birth provider who has a rate of 5 deaths in 10,000. This provider also has many other colleagues who can assess and treat issues like hypoxic events, and they are required to provide a standard of care.

          Same number of deaths per provider. Do you think that means these two providers are equally skilled? Exactly the same number of babies and mothers died under their care, right?

          If you do think these situations are equivalent, then you understand math very poorly. And that situation, played out in real life, is what we’re talking about with homebirth midwives vs. hospital providers.

      • J.B.
        November 8, 2015 at 9:17 pm #

        I’m going to stand up here for CNMs who are of course trained in a way that the Ina May crowd is not but who are not doctors either. There’s a lot to be said for delivering with a CNM in the hospital (with OB backup if needed)

        • Azuran
          November 8, 2015 at 9:49 pm #

          I agree with you. CNM are very qualified people and I totally agree that they can be left to manage most simple births with an OB supervising (in a hospital setting). If everything is going well, I see no reason why the OB should be present every single second for the entirety of every labour.
          Of course I’d expect the OB to be making frequent rounds to his patients and the nurses to have absolutely clear and very strict instruction about when an OB should be called over.

          • J.B.
            November 9, 2015 at 8:21 am #

            Are you in the US? Because for my first low risk birth I didn’t even see the ob until it was time to push. That was with l&d nurses, not with a physician extender.

          • Bugsy
            November 9, 2015 at 2:34 pm #

            That was pretty much my experience in the U.S. as well. Our second son was born in Canada, and the OB was with me for the last hour of my L&D. I really enjoyed it.

          • Medwife
            November 9, 2015 at 10:43 am #

            I have never had an RN feel the need to call an OB before I ordered her to. Just saying.

        • demodocus
          November 8, 2015 at 11:15 pm #

          If my friend’s fb posts are anything to go by, new CNMs are having a few sips from the koolaid jar too.

        • FEDUP MD
          November 9, 2015 at 1:41 am #

          I know lots of colleagues who used CNMs and loved them. All low risk of course, and every single one gave birth in a hospital with an OR and NICU right down the hall. They weren’t stupid. I wasn’t interested because I knew I was going to likely turn high risk due to family history (which I did late on) but I wasn’t opposed to the idea in general.

          • demodocus
            November 9, 2015 at 8:52 am #

            a cnm actually delivered my kiddo, with the ob a few feet away. I didn’t ask for her (the nurse) so I dunno what was up there. ‘Course at that point, I might have been okay with Big Bird, I was pretty loopy, lol.

          • demodocus
            November 9, 2015 at 8:54 am #

            I want to ask Dr. P when I see her later today.

          • The Computer Ate My Nym
            November 9, 2015 at 9:15 am #

            Great. Now I have this image in my head of Big Bird standing at a laboring woman’s bed and saying, “Today’s episode is brought to you by the letter ‘p’ for ‘push’.”

        • guest
          November 9, 2015 at 9:19 am #

          I didn’t see an OB once during my three deliveries. I gave birth in hospital (UK and Germany) where midwives attend births on their own.

          • Montserrat Blanco
            November 9, 2015 at 12:14 pm #

            It is like that in Spain as well. In the public health system (that I used) all low risk births are attended by CNM. They all have a degree in nursing plus three years training as midwives (university training) in big teaching hospitals. Some of the care I received during my admission was provided by midwives and student midwives. One of my friends, a doctor herself, gave birth with midwives only and did not see an OB until she was discharged. Low risk pregnancy, low risk birth, no complications at all.

            OBs are in the same floor, neonatologists are in the same floor and a fully staffed OR is down the hall, two minutes from delivery suites. It is a very safe way to give birth. And you can choose not to have an epidural.

          • guest
            November 9, 2015 at 2:57 pm #

            I agree. I chose the hospital all three times because I felt I could relax better if I knew there were doctors close by that could intervene should the need arise.

      • J.B.
        November 9, 2015 at 8:25 am #

        Also as a highly qualified professional in a different field the suggestion that choosing not to go to medical school means you are not smart enough-is lazy phrasing at the least. I am assuming you are specifically talking about CPMs but there are many other reasons someone would choose not to pursue medical school.

  27. SporkParade
    November 8, 2015 at 3:17 pm #

    The first childbirth story I ever heard was from my babysitter, who was born in the 1910s, about how her brother died during childbirth because the labor was obstructed and the only option was to dismember him and remove him piece by piece from her mother’s body. Whenever I hear natural birth types pooh-poohing complications that people I care about have experienced, I very badly want to bop them on the head.

  28. sdsures
    November 8, 2015 at 2:18 pm #

    Just when I thought the Duggars couldn’t get any crazier. Since the cancellation of their show via the Josh Duggar abuses, is this a new scheme to make money by the Duggar patriarch?

    • EmbraceYourInnerCrone
      November 8, 2015 at 8:53 pm #

      Oh haven t you heard? The older girls are getting a series that focuses on them an their growing families… Oh barf. And yes it’s true

    • ksharp7
      November 9, 2015 at 1:08 am #

      It’s a disguised reboot. Child endangerer Michelle was there for the birth. They are going to edit her out? Doubt it. It’s why Jill went to Central America. I would not be surprised if cameras went in July. They all but announced it last episode. It was to have something interesting to film.

  29. Michele
    November 8, 2015 at 2:12 pm #

    Great post! I noticed a typo toward the end: “Instead, Jessa lost so much money that she had to be admitted to the hospital,”
    Was that supposed to be: “Instead, Jessa lost so much blood that she had to be admitted to the hospital,”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.