Midwife charged in DC? Karen Carr, CPM...

[Anonymous]

I went to mothering.com and found the unassisted birth forum. I was very surprised that there was a roll call with over 55 responses for who was planning an unassisted birth this summer. Some of the women are also doing unassisted prenatal care.

I read many of the responses. It was striking how so many of the women all reported experienced where their medical providers had done things to them without their permission or mistreated them in the past. These were mostly not FTMs and most had chosen a hospital birth for the first without prejudice. Many women had experience with an ob/gyn or even mid wife sweeping their membranes, breaking their water or giving them an episiotomy without their prior knowledge or consent. How hard is it for a doctor or nurse or mid wife to say we need to do X, are you OK with that as opposed to just doing it and looking perplexed as to why the patient would ask what just happened to me. To the medical provider, it was no big deal but clearly to these women it was a violation and destroyed their trust in medical providers.

I wonder how many dangerous home births or unassisted births could have been avoided if ob/gyns and nurses simply followed the requirement of informed consent.

[Anonymous]

On the subject of unassisted births/unassisted prenatal care...if a baby dies during the pregnancy or birth, are these mothers (and/or fathers) generally charged with involuntary manslaughter? Genuinely curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I know that some babies don't react the same way to pain meds and epidurals but it seems silly to assume that these medications do not effect them at all. I was not trying to make the point that it is wrong to have an epidural. I was only agreeing with the PP who said that the automatic assumption that hospital birth is safer than homebirth in cases of low risk pregnancies is incorrect. A lot of people who have commented in this 74 page thread have been anti homebirth in general (not just in this particular case) and have assumed that all women who choose homebirth are taking unnecessary risks with their baby's lives. This is a false assumption and the PP and I were both trying to make the point that some unnecessary risks are also commonly taken in the hospital and that if you really want to practice what you preach and do everything that is the safest possible choice for the baby, then don't use pain meds. I wasn't judging people who choose epidurals. I was saying all of that for the point of the argument which was that it's usually safer for babies to avoid medication. But, in fact, the mother's EXPERIENCE is important and she does not have to withstand more pain than she can handle. It's pretty typical at DCUM to jump on that one sentence and ignore the larger point of the post. I don't think that epidurals are bad but I definitely think babies are more likely to be excessively sleepy after epidural. Not ALL but many and it's not even that big of a deal. This has not been proven and doctors will often deny it. My midwives seemed to think it was a given. They all crowded the room at the birth center and remarked on how alert unmedicated babies generally are. These are midwives who attend hospital birth too and see all kinds of births. Yes, this is anecdotal but there is a lot of truth in individual experiences. Not everything has to be scientifically proven to be valid.

Midwives have a vested interest in women NOT having epidurals b/c - you know what - they would be out of business if women all decided to have epidurals in hospitals. The need for a midwife would drop to zero. So perhaps you may consider the fact that midwives may not be 100% unbiased in this area.

Personally, it seems silly to assume that epidurals DO have an affect on the baby (note - not saying they don't have an affect on labor/delivery - of course they do (bad and good)) when YOU ADMIT THAT THERE IS NO RESEARCH TO BACK THIS UP. Millions of women have epidurals each year and quite frankly, I find it pretty silly that midwives and the homebirth/natural birth crowd wants to keep pretending that epidurals are bad for a baby when that just hasn't been shown AT ALL.

And your remark about how it doesn't need to be scientifically proven to be valid is just fucking stupid. Yes, I said it. But enough already with the fear mongering. If you (midwives, home birth / natural birth advocates) want to be taken seriously by the general public, then you can't just pick and choose which research you think is valid. God only knows how many times you all throw around research when it supports your cause.

[Anonymous]

10:19, plenty of midwives work in hospitals with patients who have epidurals. And something like 98% of women have epidurals during labor so I really don't think that midwives are quaking in their boot that they will be "out of business." You sound... well... I'll leave the vulgarities to you.

[Anonymous]

Here's some evidence based research for you potty mouth

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/558124_2

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/449424

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's some evidence based research for you potty mouth

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/558124_2

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/449424

Looks like you need an account to access. I signed up for one and the articles are interesting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On the subject of unassisted births/unassisted prenatal care...if a baby dies during the pregnancy or birth, are these mothers (and/or fathers) generally charged with involuntary manslaughter? Genuinely curious.

Actually, yes, there are MANY cases of damaged newborns taken away from mothers and mothers being charged for the damage knowingly caused. It's especially seen in drug-use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
On the subject of unassisted births/unassisted prenatal care...if a baby dies during the pregnancy or birth, are these mothers (and/or fathers) generally charged with involuntary manslaughter? Genuinely curious.

Actually, yes, there are MANY cases of damaged newborns taken away from mothers and mothers being charged for the damage knowingly caused. It's especially seen in drug-use.

Unassisted birth is not the same as drug use. While I think UB is insane, it is not against the law to give birth without a state approved medical provider present at your birth. I don't know of any states that have tried this or if they did it would not stand up constitutionally.

Neighbors or someone may call CPS. CPS may investigate for neglect but if the baby is being fed, the house is suitable, and the parents are present there would be no action. If the baby suffered a bad outcome the parents could only be charged with neglect if they waited an unreasonable time after the child was born to seek assistance.

CPS does intervene if the newborn tests positive for narcotics at the hospital because it provides evidence that the mother is an active drug user which is grounds to remove the child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:10:19, plenty of midwives work in hospitals with patients who have epidurals. And something like 98% of women have epidurals during labor so I really don't think that midwives are quaking in their boot that they will be "out of business." You sound... well... I'll leave the vulgarities to you.

I'm the PP that 10:19 responded to and in fact, my midwives had hospital privileges and many of their patients chose epidurals. Not once did my midwives discourage me from having an epidural. That was entirely my decision with no input from them. It was only after the birth that they commented to one another about the obvious fact that unmedicated babies are usually so alert. I do not judge anyone for having an epidural. I support women making their own decisions about birth, whatever those decisions might be. But I still think it's obvious that unmedicated babies are going to be different from medicated babies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we take off our tiaras, it seems like such minutiae to devote our existence as parents to the actual hour or a few hours of the birth process. Whether you had a c-section or an orgasmic unmedicated birth on a bed of organic granola, you are still a parent at the end of it. Although for what it's worth, according to medical science you're more likely to be a parent of a living and non-brain damaged child if you undergo birth in a facility with doctors and trained medical professionals.

After establishing Karen Carr as an unlicensed fraud, now this conversation has moved to epidural sleepiness and breast feeding tips.

After 74 pages!!! of comments, can we all just agree that CPMs should be discredited and those who risk someone else's baby operating without a license or in a state where it is prohibited should be held to account and humiliated and defenestrated.

I think this conversation is over. Karen Carr should rot in jail. Case closed.

No, we can't all agree. I certainly don't agree with much of anything you said. You lost me when you started in with the "according to medical science..." and you REALLY lost me when you suggested defenestration and humiliation.

I'd be happy to see where "medical science" states conclusively that you're more likely to have an uncomplicated birth experience in a "facility with doctors and trained medical personnel" any time you'd like to link us to the study that says that. Additionally, there are a lot of ways to get training in something. I posted several pages up about some of the ways to get licensed as a midwife. Going to nursing school isn't the only way. They do train, they do study, they are certified, they can get licensed. Karen Carr wasn't. That's a Karen Carr issue, not an across the board CPM issue.

You don't speak for me and I'm sure you don't speak for a bunch of other posters on this thread either.

[Anonymous]

How about if they just stop presenting themselves as "certified" if that certification is basically meaningless. People who want a Direct Entry Midwife can just choose one knowing that there is no science involved. No presentation of professional certification or education. Just pure biblical painful childbirth the way god intended it. No fake credentials needed.

[Anonymous]

These comments about the raid on an Amish raw milk The FDA raid on an Amish raw milk farm and the debate that surrounds it are very similar to the arguments going on in this thread. Not to start a raw milk tangent, but just to point out the general themes in both. Substitute raw milk (unsafe) people for the home birth/CPM/CNM crowd and the industrial (safe) milk crowd for the hospital birth crowd. The comments all refer to risks and their willingness to take them.

Dave Gumpert, a journalist who follows the raw milk issue and has authored a book on the subject, Raw Milk Revolution–The Emerging Battle Over Food Rights penned this blog about the sting:

Five Suggestions How the Maryland Food Club Can Fight Back (and How the Rest of Us Can Help)

Here is another Gumpert article on FDA sting from Grist.

The voices of protest also spilled over onto the FDA Facebook page, where comments were left, and then the commenters “unliked” the page to show their disgust and lack of support for the government harassment of the farmer and farm patrons.

Here are a few Facebook comments that I thought were worth noting:

I think that it is appalling that you would raid an innocent Amish farm. The 10 million raw milk drinkers in this country support the raw milk sales. If raw milk was so bad we would see the outbreaks, instead we are seeing more and more outbreaks from your filthy, toxic, ultra-pasteurized, homogenized, standardized, BASTARDIZED white crap that you dare to call milk. The American people deserve better. WE WANT REAL FOOD!! We would not take the “risk” associated if we had not already researched and considered the “consequences”. I have experienced nothing but benefits from raw milk. Perhaps you are afraid that the American populace will learn the truth, that your pills are poison!! Stop attacking small farmers and natural health remedies and give back the rights of the American people to real food. BACK OFF!!

–Tanisha Waggoner

The FDA needs to dismantled, defunded, and shut down permanently. Or at the very least get out of bed with the Pharmaceuticals and big Corporations. The corruption runs ridiculously deep.

–Troy-Sarah Johnson

I have an inherent right to eat the wholesome foods of my choosing. I have an inherent right to eat the foods that the Creator has created for humanity – naturally produced foods, from animals and plants raised humanely, without overcrowding, hormones, genetic modification, or antibiotics or other unnatural, inhumane, or toxic methods to the animal, plant, soil, or the humans who work the soil. Leave the Amish alone, leave the natural farmers alone, leave the raw milk foodists alone – and start looking at how genetic modifications, overuse of antibiotics and pesticides, and unsanitary conditions on factory farms and in overly large processing plants cause the vast majority of severe gastrointestinal illnesses and deaths in this country.

–Sandra Nicht

What I want to know is what difference does it make who’s right? There will never be a shortage of data proving one side or the other.

The point is that all this time and money is being spent by the government to remove a basic right from a small group of people. No one against raw milk will be forced to consume it against their will. I understand the risk and am happy to sign a release if necessary – I would not blame the FDA if I got sick.

What’s the big deal, really? It’s legal for me to smoke and drink both of which are known to adversely affect my health and wellbeing…. why can’t they just put the Surgeon General’s warning on the stupid milk and leave small farmers alone?

–Auburn Meadow Farm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about if they just stop presenting themselves as "certified" if that certification is basically meaningless. People who want a Direct Entry Midwife can just choose one knowing that there is no science involved. No presentation of professional certification or education. Just pure biblical painful childbirth the way god intended it. No fake credentials needed.

Pure and biblical painful childbirths OFTEN end in pure and biblican painful death of mother, baby, or both. I know that home birth does NOT equal unassisted birth, and that plenty of midwives are very competent. I don't want to judge the desire or take away the right to birth at home. However, the movement often seems to distrust any regulating that would ensure competence of who assists you, and no matter how competent, midwives are simply ill-equipped to deal with the complications that can occur since they require IMMEDIATE medical intervention to prevent death or long-term damage. As such, I still don't like the idea. This particular case discredits responsible home birthers and midwives, since warnings were abound. I would focus my energy on a better acceptance of midwives in the hospital.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about if they just stop presenting themselves as "certified" if that certification is basically meaningless. People who want a Direct Entry Midwife can just choose one knowing that there is no science involved. No presentation of professional certification or education. Just pure biblical painful childbirth the way god intended it. No fake credentials needed.

Well, I do agree that, if there's one thing I would like to see as an outcome of this tragedy, it's that the 'Certified Professional' part of CPM will be dropped by law. It is misleading in an almost criminal way. Just keep the 'Midwife' and then parents can ask: 'How many births have you done? ...Can you give me any references?' and so on, and then they can decide for themselves. Assisting with 20 births without a high school diploma does NOT make one a 'Certified Professional' of any sort. In that case the title and the certification are truly meaningless and useless. Experience is where "CP"Ms will vary wildly. I do think registration should be required, so that there is at least some kind of tracking, or a possibility to do a background check.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about if they just stop presenting themselves as "certified" if that certification is basically meaningless. People who want a Direct Entry Midwife can just choose one knowing that there is no science involved. No presentation of professional certification or education. Just pure biblical painful childbirth the way god intended it. No fake credentials needed.

I am a certified doula. This certification is also not handed out by the government but by a ruling body of doulas who made the certification up for themselves. Is that certification also not "valid"? What makes a certification valid and meaningful, anyway? The government doesn't certify anybody. Other people, experts in the same profession, certify people. Which is what a CPM is. So a CPM has a valid certification if you are going by that definition. Just not one recognized by Maryland.