Homebirth vs Hospital (pregnant, infect, blood pressure, physician)

[Earniefan]

I also don't want any pain meds. I would be terrified to have a giant needle stuck in my spine...

Uh-huh, get back to us after you've felt contractions! You sound just like me before I had experienced it. A needle in the back is not so terrifying when you're having contractions for 90 seconds with a 30 second break in between, lol. BTW, I was only dialated to a 4 at that point.

[karen_s]

I've evolved in my birthing preferences. I had my first son in the hospital, with drugs and all kinds of stupid interventions. He was so sleepy after birth and it was nightmare getting him to latch on.

For son #2, I had an unmedicated hospital birth and refused all unnecessary interventions there (which was a pain). I wish I had known and researched homebirth because there was no reason for us to be at the hospital.

For my daughter (#3), we had a wonderful homebirth with a very experienced midwife. Part of the safety concerns about homebirth can easily be put aside when you are dealing with an experienced practitioner who is well aware of when transfer is indicated and does so properly. My midwife had oxygen and Pitocin with her and my DH is a paramedic with NALS, so I felt more than safe at home. As it stood, my labor ended up so fast that going to the hospital would have most likely been futile.

For those who love their epidurals, I must admit I did too with my first son when my natural coping techniques did not work. Unfortunately, I had a wound healing problem at the insertion site and long-standing back pain there as well. I will not have an epidural again.

[GreenMachine]

Originally Posted by happeemommee

I was just curious on the opinion of others on this subject. I've had five daughters, three at home, two in the hospital. Four with no pain meds. My homebirths were planed and a midwife attended.

I don't have any children, but I always imagined that if I did have one, I would do whatever possible to have them naturally without pain meds, just squat and push. How did you make it without the pain meds? Do you think more women should tough it out that way?

Greenie

[PoconoNurse]

AS a Labor and Delivery nurse for over 22 years, I have seen alot..............I've worked in Newark, Edison, New Brunswick, Northern NJ, Scranton and Easton PA. While I respect and support the parents who advocate a natural unmedicated birth, a homebirth is risky business. There are many factors/situations that can happen in a blink that require immediate attention. Ruptured membranes that are bloodstained/meconium stained, shoulder dystocia, a placental abruption, a cord prolapse, many events that can occur and need stat attention for a live, well baby. No medications are fine, but consider these potential circumstances, as well as the baby once born that may need some immediate interventions not found in a home. After 5 minutes of limited oxygen, brain damage/ cerebral palsy can happen. I have four children myself, the first three I used pain medication, the last, none. Two of the births required immediate delivery interventions. What happens if you begin to hemorrhage and the baby needs assistance as well? Hospitals are there to handle the unforseen, and with you and a precious baby, why tempt fate?

[eddiek]

Exactly.

Unfortunately, all too many people believe in the "natural is safe" theory for everything, form deliveries to drugs.

Bad things can happen to anyone at any time. But, why tempt fate?

Deliver in a hospital where the skills, emergency equipment and resources are available to handle the emergency.

[Patty Stewart]

I had five children, one in a birthing center, the next one at home and the next three in the hospital. I prefer giving birth at home in my comfortable surroundings without distractions. In the hospital the nurses kept coming in and out, insisting on checking me during contractions, desperately wanting to put a monitor on me, offering me drugs. My husband had to tell them to leave us alone. HOWEVER, it is a safer place to have a baby. My son who was delivered at home had shoulder dystocia. He was 10 pounds 4 ounces at birth but no one was able to tell that I was carrying a large baby - even though I was only 135 pounds at delivery. We panicked a bit as he got stuck and his face started turning blue. Thank God we were able to get him out before anything more serious happened, however, he did have a broken collar bone and a large hemotoma on his head. So, have your children in the hospital, just in case, but let your doctors and nurses know that you want to be left alone and not offered any drugs. After my last birth of a 9 pound 14 ounce boy, one of nurses said to me, "your delivery was so calm and peaceful. You make me want to have another baby!"

[songinthewind7]

Originally Posted by happeemommee

I was just curious on the opinion of others on this subject. I've had five daughters, three at home, two in the hospital. Four with no pain meds. My homebirths were planed and a midwife attended.

I think having a baby at home with a midwife is the way to go.

[Katiana]

Originally Posted by GreenMachine

I don't have any children, but I always imagined that if I did have one, I would do whatever possible to have them naturally without pain meds, just squat and push. How did you make it without the pain meds? Do you think more women should tough it out that way?

Greenie

"In sorrow thou shall bring forth children" Genesis 3:16. God supposedly said this to Eve after she ate the apple. It went through my head when I was in labor with my first child. No, I do not think women should tough it out unnecessarily. It is better for the baby if the mom has little or no pain med, but no one should have to bear extreme pain. The meds will clear out of the baby's system quickly. It's not always a matter of "just squat and push". It depends on the size of the baby's head and the size of the mother's pelvis. MY first baby was small, and she had a relatively small head. The second one was larger, with a larger head. I had no pain med with the first, and two shots with the second.

[nettles]

Originally Posted by Padgett2

And if your baby is one of those that needs oxygen right after birth? Suppose you start to bleed uncontrollably? Or the placenta does come out like it's supposed to?

How's the traffic between your house and the hospital? How long will it take to get you or the baby there if you need help?

Many babies are successfully born at home. It can be done with no problem. You simply have to be sure that you want to take the risk that something may go wrong and your baby may not make it.

It boils down to whether or not you can handle feeling guilty about it.

CPMs carry oxygen and are certified in neonatal resus.

They carry herbs and pitocin and methergine for bleeding, are trained in physical ways to stop a flow, can scrub down and go in after a placenta if it is critical to get it out.

Usually that isn't needed. A retained placenta isn't a dire emergency. We watch for signs and symptoms of hidden bleeding, and, as I said before, react. But it is mostly watchful waiting, and if the placenta isn't detaching then we transport, calmly.

Something may go wrong, yes. The statistics indicate that for low risk women something may go wrong equally in a hospital setting.

[eddiek]

Originally Posted by songinthewind7

I think having a baby at home with a midwife is the way to go.

Sure- if every goes well. BUT- if it doesn't, you are risking the wll being of your infant. Midwives cannot treat every thing which may happen, and there are a lot of things which can go wrong during the delivery process.

Why not be safer and have the infant in a hospital, with the obstetrician available and resources for adversity in place?