Anonymous wrote:I was low risk and healthy and wanted to try an unmedicated birth and they seemed the least stressful medical people to interface with. That being said, I decided to go with midwives at a hospital rather than a home birth because I was worried about the risk of having to move if something went wrong and I do think that was the right choice for me; I wouldn’t want a home birth unless the baby came so fast it was unavoidable.

This was the same reasoning behind why I went with midwives for my first baby. L&D went to hell and I ended up having an instrument delivery with a Dr.

For my second baby (I moved in the interim) I originally picked midwives (similar set up -- midwives at a hospital, same general practice as the OBs) and miscarried that pregnancy. Through the miscarriage process, I interacted with the OBs and the midwives, and just got a better vibe from the OBs. Nothing was "wrong" with the midwives, I just liked the OBs I met with better. I got pregnant again quickly after, and chose the OBs. THAT baby ultimately ended up being delivered by a midwife just because she was who happened to be free to catch the baby at that point.

I dunno. I guess I like the midwifery model better, but I do think that a hospital practice with both is a good choice for many -- the midwives often end up influencing the OBs, and you have OB backup easily if you need it.

Anybody know what happened to Loudoun Community Midwives? I received a letter that the practice dissolved a few weeks ago. I was so disappointed to hear that. They delivered both of my children, starting back when they were at Inova Loudoun, and my care was so wonderful that I stuck with them for my yearly checkups, too.

I like midwives more than doctors. That's why. All 3 kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll just leave this here. So many of you are so ignorantly brainwashed into thinking you need constant fetal monitoring or a waterfall of interventions. It's really sad and completely indicative of why the US has abysmal maternal fetal mortality rates and maternal and PP care in general.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2742137/

Yes, please tell my baby's umbilical cord that it shouldn't have knotted up during labor, resulting in an emergency c section as the heart rate flatlined. Thanks to continuous fetal heart rate monitoring, it as caught immediately.

Most deaths as caused by cardiovascular issues like pre eclampsia, and c section would have saved both mom and baby.

Black women often aren't taken seriously and given needed interventions resulting in worse outcomes. They need more help not less.

Wherever they have tried to reduce c section rates, still births and maternal deaths increased.

Oh PP, this is too logical. The midwife defender has Alternative facts produced by midwives that show that Midwife-led care is what we need to reduce maternal mortality and increase quality of care. She just knows how awful C sections are because it deviates from “normal physiologic birth” and midwives tell her that vaginal births are better (and of course let’s not forget that midwives aren’t the ones doing hysterectomies and prolapse surgeries and treating women for anal and urinary incontinence weeks, months, and years down the line so the downstream impact of vaginal birth isn’t something they really see). You’re being too logical for her.