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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The US has one of the wost maternal mortality rates amongst industrialized nations. The safest thing would be to either 1) stay home, or 2) give birth in a different country.

Seems to me that in weighing risk factors...having a baby attended by an OB in a hospital in the US is a bad choice.

That being so, according to the PP, most mothers do not understand risk.

Key word is "industrialized". Infant mortality is significantly lower in the US compared to countries without medical intervention readily available. So if you compare the numbers to nations where mothers are forced to have unattended births, your theory is nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

"Birth is a natural process, and there is some truth to the Darwinistic aspect, but I prefer to think that God has other plans. We can't begin to understand, or explain, or file a lawsuit on everything. In nature, not all births come to fruition. With people too, not all people are supposed to be birth parents. I would not put it that bluntly to the grieving mother, but that's what my feelings would be. "

Are we to assume that if you or someone you loved got cancer or heart disease or diabetes or hurt in an acciddnt you would not seek medical care because it is part of God's plan? It's all natural selection after all. In some parts of the world women still died during childbirth on a regular basis. Is that God's master plan too?

Good Lord.

Some, yes. Some, no. God didn't make cars. So seeking treatment after a vehicle accident is OK. God did make babies, so we must follow his command on the approach and treatment. A heart attack is certainly a natural phenomenon. Some people live after them and some people don't. Humans control diet and exercise so we do have some control over the heart attacks. Same with the diabetes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The US has one of the wost maternal mortality rates amongst industrialized nations. The safest thing would be to either 1) stay home, or 2) give birth in a different country.

Seems to me that in weighing risk factors...having a baby attended by an OB in a hospital in the US is a bad choice.

That being so, according to the PP, most mothers do not understand risk.

The US has one of the worst healthcare systems amongst industrialized nations. The safest thing would be to either 1) treat yourself at home, or 2) get healthcare in another country.

You can't see why those are false equivalences?

If you want to say that giving birth at home is safer, lets do a large (say ~100,000 participants) study, in which every single mother who gives birth at home is matched with a woman who has a similar history of prenatal care, pregnancy problems, race, and socioeconomic status, but who has elected to give birth in a local hospital. Then we'll follow the women until 1 year after birth to see if we can find a significant difference between the outcomes of the two groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Birth is a natural process, and there is some truth to the Darwinistic aspect, but I prefer to think that God has other plans. We can't begin to understand, or explain, or file a lawsuit on everything. In nature, not all births come to fruition. With people too, not all people are supposed to be birth parents. I would not put it that bluntly to the grieving mother, but that's what my feelings would be. "

Are we to assume that if you or someone you loved got cancer or heart disease or diabetes or hurt in an acciddnt you would not seek medical care because it is part of God's plan? It's all natural selection after all. In some parts of the world women still died during childbirth on a regular basis. Is that God's master plan too?

Good Lord.

Some, yes. Some, no. God didn't make cars. So seeking treatment after a vehicle accident is OK. God did make babies, so we must follow his command on the approach and treatment. A heart attack is certainly a natural phenomenon. Some people live after them and some people don't. Humans control diet and exercise so we do have some control over the heart attacks. Same with the diabetes.

So if your child developed type 1 diabetes and needed insulin to live, you would say that God made your child, so your child is perfect, so your child can't be treated with exogenous (man-made) insulin?

Also, I don't recall any comments from God (or anyone else, for that matter) concerning the appropriate treatment of fetal late decelerations, placenta previa, breech birth, or neonatal sepsis. In the absence of any direct commands, do we just do what we think is best?

I'll say it again: if what you think and what you think God thinks are exactly aligned, you need to take a good, hard look at yourself and ask why it is that the most perfect, all-knowing being in the universe happens to agree with you on every point. I promise, you're not nearly as perfect and God-loving as you think you are, and these attitudes can cause preventable deaths, usually of women and children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US has one of the wost maternal mortality rates amongst industrialized nations. The safest thing would be to either 1) stay home, or 2) give birth in a different country.

Seems to me that in weighing risk factors...having a baby attended by an OB in a hospital in the US is a bad choice.

That being so, according to the PP, most mothers do not understand risk.

Key word is "industrialized". Infant mortality is significantly lower in the US compared to countries without medical intervention readily available. So if you compare the numbers to nations where mothers are forced to have unattended births, your theory is nonsense.

By using industrialized nations only, the comparison is apples to apples...much more precise than your concept.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US has one of the wost maternal mortality rates amongst industrialized nations. The safest thing would be to either 1) stay home, or 2) give birth in a different country.

Seems to me that in weighing risk factors...having a baby attended by an OB in a hospital in the US is a bad choice.

That being so, according to the PP, most mothers do not understand risk.

The US has one of the worst healthcare systems amongst industrialized nations. The safest thing would be to either 1) treat yourself at home, or 2) get healthcare in another country.

You can't see why those are false equivalences?

If you want to say that giving birth at home is safer, lets do a large (say ~100,000 participants) study, in which every single mother who gives birth at home is matched with a woman who has a similar history of prenatal care, pregnancy problems, race, and socioeconomic status, but who has elected to give birth in a local hospital. Then we'll follow the women until 1 year after birth to see if we can find a significant difference between the outcomes of the two groups.

Oh, I absolutely do think people should treat themselves at home more. As a whole, we rely on medicine and pharma way too much.

I disagree that they are false equivalences.

WRT the study you are suggesting....great idea! However (just guessing here), I doubt we would be able to fill the HB side. That's a *huge* number for a study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Birth is a natural process, and there is some truth to the Darwinistic aspect, but I prefer to think that God has other plans. We can't begin to understand, or explain, or file a lawsuit on everything. In nature, not all births come to fruition. With people too, not all people are supposed to be birth parents. I would not put it that bluntly to the grieving mother, but that's what my feelings would be. "

Are we to assume that if you or someone you loved got cancer or heart disease or diabetes or hurt in an acciddnt you would not seek medical care because it is part of God's plan? It's all natural selection after all. In some parts of the world women still died during childbirth on a regular basis. Is that God's master plan too?

Good Lord.

Some, yes. Some, no. God didn't make cars. So seeking treatment after a vehicle accident is OK. God did make babies, so we must follow his command on the approach and treatment. A heart attack is certainly a natural phenomenon. Some people live after them and some people don't. Humans control diet and exercise so we do have some control over the heart attacks. Same with the diabetes.

So if your child developed type 1 diabetes and needed insulin to live, you would say that God made your child, so your child is perfect, so your child can't be treated with exogenous (man-made) insulin?

Also, I don't recall any comments from God (or anyone else, for that matter) concerning the appropriate treatment of fetal late decelerations, placenta previa, breech birth, or neonatal sepsis. In the absence of any direct commands, do we just do what we think is best?

I'll say it again: if what you think and what you think God thinks are exactly aligned, you need to take a good, hard look at yourself and ask why it is that the most perfect, all-knowing being in the universe happens to agree with you on every point. I promise, you're not nearly as perfect and God-loving as you think you are, and these attitudes can cause preventable deaths, usually of women and children.

Ugh, I wish people would leave God out of this conversation. God is just an euphemism for a midwife who was playing God instead of using common sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US has one of the wost maternal mortality rates amongst industrialized nations. The safest thing would be to either 1) stay home, or 2) give birth in a different country.

Seems to me that in weighing risk factors...having a baby attended by an OB in a hospital in the US is a bad choice.

That being so, according to the PP, most mothers do not understand risk.

Key word is "industrialized". Infant mortality is significantly lower in the US compared to countries without medical intervention readily available. So if you compare the numbers to nations where mothers are forced to have unattended births, your theory is nonsense.

By using industrialized nations only, the comparison is apples to apples...much more precise than your concept.

But that's my point. Industrialized nations tend to have more hospital births than home births. So the comparison PP made isn't exact enough and would only be relevant to this discussion if this was solely based on home birth vs hospital birth. But to do that one would have to be able to filter other factors such as healthcare in general, parental education, etc etc. So it still isn't precise enough for the situation we are talking about. But that's the thing about statistics in general.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Birth is a natural process, and there is some truth to the Darwinistic aspect, but I prefer to think that God has other plans. We can't begin to understand, or explain, or file a lawsuit on everything. In nature, not all births come to fruition. With people too, not all people are supposed to be birth parents. I would not put it that bluntly to the grieving mother, but that's what my feelings would be. "

Are we to assume that if you or someone you loved got cancer or heart disease or diabetes or hurt in an acciddnt you would not seek medical care because it is part of God's plan? It's all natural selection after all. In some parts of the world women still died during childbirth on a regular basis. Is that God's master plan too?

Good Lord.

Some, yes. Some, no. God didn't make cars. So seeking treatment after a vehicle accident is OK. God did make babies, so we must follow his command on the approach and treatment. A heart attack is certainly a natural phenomenon. Some people live after them and some people don't. Humans control diet and exercise so we do have some control over the heart attacks. Same with the diabetes.

Um... an overy and sperm make a baby, by the (hopefully) voluntary act of a penis entering and ejaculating to a vagina. Every more controllable than the effects of diet and exercise, no? If in a dish in a lab, even more deliberate, no? And read a book, will ya? Though diabetes CAN be provoked by lifestyles, it's a genetic predisposition. Some babies are BORN with it - from perfectly healthy parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Birth is a natural process, and there is some truth to the Darwinistic aspect, but I prefer to think that God has other plans. We can't begin to understand, or explain, or file a lawsuit on everything. In nature, not all births come to fruition. With people too, not all people are supposed to be birth parents. I would not put it that bluntly to the grieving mother, but that's what my feelings would be. "

Are we to assume that if you or someone you loved got cancer or heart disease or diabetes or hurt in an acciddnt you would not seek medical care because it is part of God's plan? It's all natural selection after all. In some parts of the world women still died during childbirth on a regular basis. Is that God's master plan too?

Good Lord.

Some, yes. Some, no. God didn't make cars. So seeking treatment after a vehicle accident is OK. God did make babies, so we must follow his command on the approach and treatment. A heart attack is certainly a natural phenomenon. Some people live after them and some people don't. Humans control diet and exercise so we do have some control over the heart attacks. Same with the diabetes.

Um... an overy and sperm make a baby, by the (hopefully) voluntary act of a penis entering and ejaculating to a vagina. Every more controllable than the effects of diet and exercise, no? If in a dish in a lab, even more deliberate, no? And read a book, will ya? Though diabetes CAN be provoked by lifestyles, it's a genetic predisposition. Some babies are BORN with it - from perfectly healthy parents.

Um...an ovary and sperm do not, have not and will not ever make a baby. An ovary contains ova...one of which will be released so as to meet up with a sperm. It is at that point that an ovum and egg will make a baby. All this, of course, was put in place by God. God, therefore, makes babies.

[Anonymous]

*ovum and sperm

[Anonymous]

I find it interesting that midwives have been much more consistent over time with their treatment of women and birth than the medical community. Yes, midwives have adopted some medical treatments but they seemed to have done so only when absolutely necessary and still follow the same approach to birth. The medical providers seem to sway back and forth on a pendulum.

In our mother's time, it was common practice to give the woman an enema, shave her, have her lie flat on her back with her legs up in stirrups, cut an episotomy as a standard for everyone, give her a drug similar to versed to make her forget the pain, and sometimes strap her arms down if she could not hold still. Mothers were told not to breastfeed. These things have changed in medicine but it took a long time even after evidence and studies showed that the practices were either useless or harmful. Those were women were all told that these things were absolutely necessary or they and their babies would die. There seemed to be a period in the 80s when natural birth was becoming more common in hospital but now interventionist birth with skyrocketing induction and c-section rates is the trend. Its easy to predict that our daughters will look back in horror about what we have to deal with when giving birth. Its hard to trust the ob/gyns when there is so much history of adopting bad practices.

[Anonymous]

Interesting article that is semi-related to this debate.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/10/09/061009fa_fact?currentPage=1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I find it interesting that midwives have been much more consistent over time with their treatment of women and birth than the medical community. Yes, midwives have adopted some medical treatments but they seemed to have done so only when absolutely necessary and still follow the same approach to birth. The medical providers seem to sway back and forth on a pendulum.

In our mother's time, it was common practice to give the woman an enema, shave her, have her lie flat on her back with her legs up in stirrups, cut an episotomy as a standard for everyone, give her a drug similar to versed to make her forget the pain, and sometimes strap her arms down if she could not hold still. Mothers were told not to breastfeed. These things have changed in medicine but it took a long time even after evidence and studies showed that the practices were either useless or harmful. Those were women were all told that these things were absolutely necessary or they and their babies would die. There seemed to be a period in the 80s when natural birth was becoming more common in hospital but now interventionist birth with skyrocketing induction and c-section rates is the trend. Its easy to predict that our daughters will look back in horror about what we have to deal with when giving birth. Its hard to trust the ob/gyns when there is so much history of adopting bad practices.

Changing practice as we learn more about how things work is a feature, not a bug, of medicine. I really don't want a midwife that uses the same techniques that were used 2000 years ago, thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"Birth is a natural process, and there is some truth to the Darwinistic aspect, but I prefer to think that God has other plans. We can't begin to understand, or explain, or file a lawsuit on everything. In nature, not all births come to fruition. With people too, not all people are supposed to be birth parents. I would not put it that bluntly to the grieving mother, but that's what my feelings would be. "

Are we to assume that if you or someone you loved got cancer or heart disease or diabetes or hurt in an acciddnt you would not seek medical care because it is part of God's plan? It's all natural selection after all. In some parts of the world women still died during childbirth on a regular basis. Is that God's master plan too?

Good Lord.

Some, yes. Some, no. God didn't make cars. So seeking treatment after a vehicle accident is OK. God did make babies, so we must follow his command on the approach and treatment. A heart attack is certainly a natural phenomenon. Some people live after them and some people don't. Humans control diet and exercise so we do have some control over the heart attacks. Same with the diabetes.

Um... an overy and sperm make a baby, by the (hopefully) voluntary act of a penis entering and ejaculating to a vagina. Every more controllable than the effects of diet and exercise, no? If in a dish in a lab, even more deliberate, no? And read a book, will ya? Though diabetes CAN be provoked by lifestyles, it's a genetic predisposition. Some babies are BORN with it - from perfectly healthy parents.

Um...an ovary and sperm do not, have not and will not ever make a baby. An ovary contains ova...one of which will be released so as to meet up with a sperm. It is at that point that an ovum and egg will make a baby. All this, of course, was put in place by God. God, therefore, makes babies.

Then we're all made by god and everything we touch is derivative of it. So either you take responsibility and get back to an on-subject form or argument in this forum or you stop eating, drinking, doing anything for yourself b/c god creates and controls everything FOR you.