Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Astynax (talk | contribs) at 19:16, 6 May 2009 (→Factors in opting for a home birth: subtitle added). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (May 2009) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

A Home birth is a birth that is planned to occur at home. It is often contrasted to birth that occur in a hospital or a birth centre.

Types of home births

Homebirths are divided into two types — attended and unattended births.

• Attended births are those at which a trained medical professional attends, usually a midwife, although sometimes a general practitioner.

• Unattended births, which are sometimes called freebirths may involve simply the woman herself, or a woman attended by her partner, friends, family or a birth attendant called a doula.

Factors in opting for a home birth

Being in familiar surroundings is an important factor in chosing home birth for many women. Discomfort or fear of hospitals, birthing centers or strangers can be a factor for others. Yet others feel that home birth is more natural and less stressful.

For other women, immediate access to medical help in a birthing center or hospital setting is very important. During a homebirth there is no access to pharmaceutical pain relief or pharmaceutical labor induction, nor equipment and supplies for emergency delivery, neonatal intensive care and procedures for addressing other medical crises. Births necessitating these interventions would require transfer to a hospital. Depending on the midwifery practice, transfer rates can range anywhere from 5% to 40%, but most studies cite a transfer rate of about 16%.

World Health Organization position

The WHO has released a statement supporting the right of women to choose where they give birth. In the case of low-risk pregnancies, with appropriate support and contingency plans women can give birth at home.

The Rapid Decline and Gradual Rise of Home Birth in the West

In many Western countries, home birth declined over the 20th century due to migration to urban centers, increased accessibility of hospitals and unwillingness of doctors to attend to women in their homes. As one doctor described birth in a working class home in the 1920s.

You find a bed that has been slept on by the husband, wife and one or two children; it has frequently been soaked with urine, the sheets are dirty, and the patient's garments are soiled, she has not had a bath. Instead of sterile dressings you have a few old rags or the discharges are allowed to soak into a nightdress which is not changed for days.

This experience is contrasted with a 1920s hospital birth by Adolf Weber:

The mother lies in a well-aired disinfected room, light and sunlight stream unhindered through a high window and you can make it light as day electrically too. She is well bathed and freshly clothed on linen sheets of blinding whitenes... You have a staff of assistants who respond to every signal... Only those who have to repair a perineum in a cottars's house in a cottar's bed with the poor light and help at hand can realize the joy.

There was a revival of midwifery, the practice supporting a natural approach to birth, in the United States in the 1970s. However, although there was a steep increase in midwife-attended births between 1975 to 2002 (from less than 1.0% to 8.1%), most of these births occurred in the hospital and the US rate of out-of-hospital birth has remained steady at 1% of all births since 1989 with 27.3% of these in a free-standing birth center and 65.4% in a residence. Hence, the actual rate of home birth in the United States has remained remarkably low (0.65%) over the past twenty years.

Home birth in the United Kingdom has also received some press over the past few years as there has been a movement, most notably in Wales, to increase home birth rates to 10% by 2007. Between 2005 to 2006, there was an increase of 16% of home birth rates in Wales, but the total home birth rate is still 3% even in Wales (double the national rate) and in some other counties of Great Britain the home birth rate is still under 1%. In Australia, birth at home has fallen steadily over the years and is currently 0.3%, ranging from nearly 1% in the Northern Territory to 0.1% in Queensland. The New Zealand rate for births at home is nearly three times Australia's with a rate of 2.5% and increasing.

In the Netherlands, an opposite trend has taken place: in the 1965, two-thirds of Dutch births took place at home, but currently, that figure has dropped to less than a third – about 30%.

Research on Safety

In 2007, after a comprehensive review of the literature, the UK’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) released the following recommendations concerning the location of birth:

With relation to women’s and babies’ outcomes for home births, there is a lack of good quality evidence. The evidence in relation to perinatal mortality is not strong enough to support past or current policies of increasing or decreasing current provision outside consultant units. Women should be offered the choice of planning birth at home, in a midwifery-led unit, or a consultant-led unit . Before making their choice, women should be informed of the potential risks and benefits of each birth setting.

"As a minimum," the NICE report continues to state, such information should include the following:

• Planning birth at home: increases the likelihood of normal vaginal birth and satisfaction in women who are committed to giving birth in this setting, compared with planning birth in a hospital
• Planning birth in a consultant-led unit: increases the likelihood of pharmacological analgesia, interventions and an instrumental birth, and decreases satisfaction, compared with planning birth in other birth settings. There may be a lower risk of perinatal mortality when care is delivered in a consultant-led unit."

Study Design

The research concerning the safety of home birth is few and far between, and much of it is of questionable methodology . In fact, there are no randomized controlled trials for home birth, possibly because maternal choice is such a major aspect of home birth and thus, few mothers would be willing to be randomly assigned to either the home birth or the hospital birth. The studies that do exist tend to be matched cohort studies conducted either retrospectively (by selecting hospital records that match the characteristics of the home birth records), by matched pairs (by pairing study participants based on their background characteristics), or by using multivariate analysis to control for background variables.

However, even in cohort studies, there are many differences between women who choose to give birth at home versus in hospital. There are unquantifiable differences in home birth patients, such as maternal attitudes towards medical involvement in birth, and demographically, home birth patients tend towards being more multiparous, less ethnic minorities, attend more prenatal visits, be slightly taller and lighter, of better educational background, and have fewer previous obstetric complications, including cesarean sections. Thus, none of the studies conducted were able to study a large enough group of matched births to make any definitive statements concerning perinatal mortality, and other rare complications.

The most recent research contained in the Cochrane systematic review of the literature, (published on the Cochrane database; the source from which hospital policies are usually created), states that there is not enough evidence to decide one way or another, whether home or hospital birth is safer (Olsen & Jewell: 2000 (CD000352) in Hofmeyr et al:2008:252).

Maternal safety

All medical interventions were substantially decreased in the home birth sample, including the use of any pain medication or analgesics including epidurals, forceps or vacuum extraction, episiotomy and cesarean sections. Accordingly, the likelihood of normal vaginal birth was also greatly increased in the home birth sample. The studies were able to establish that there was no difference between the home birth and the hospital birth groups in the incidence of pre-eclampsia, premature rupture of membranes, or premature birth. Except in the 1989-1992 Zurich study , the length of labor tended to be longer during home birth, which is unsurprising given the five-fold lower incidence of induction of labor in the home birth populations.

In terms of maternal outcome, no study found any statistically significant difference between the number of women that had third-degree perineal lacerations or postpartum hemorrhage. However, the 1998-1999 British Columbia study did find a three- to four-fold less likelihood of infection for both the infant and the mother, and all studies reported a substantially higher likelihood of an intact perineum in the home birth sample.

Infant Safety

Perinatal outcome is more complicated to assess due to the low incidence of mortality and the difficulty in achieving appropriate study design. No reliable evidence presently exists for differences in infant safety in low-risk women.

Legal situation in the United States

No state prosecutes mothers for giving birth outside of a hospital. However, midwives who assist at such births may be prosecuted in some areas.

In 37 states it is legal to acquire the services of a midwife. Many midwives continue to attend mothers in states where it is illegal, while efforts are underway to change the law.

Practicing as a direct-entry midwife is still (as of May 2006) illegal under certain circumstances in Washington, D.C. and the following states: Alabama, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming. However, Certified Nurse Midwives can legally practice in these areas.

Legal situation in Australia

Although some State Governments have now introduced government funded home birth services, including the Northern Territory, Western Australia, New South Wales and South Australia, independent homebirthing in Australia may be illegal by July 2010 by default. This is due to legislation pending at that time, introducing compulsory registration of all health professionals, and requiring that all health professionals carry professional indemnity insurance. Independent midwives in most Australian States and Territories are not currently insurable, and hence by default will be unable to register as health professionals in 2010. A woman does currently have the right to hire an uninsured independent midwife to attend her homebirth. If the midwife is negligent, most have their personal assets arranged to avoid any compensation payouts. Midwives and people who wish homebirth to remain as a choice for Australian women are currently lobbying to protect the profession. In April 2007, the Western Australian Government announced that it would be expanding birth at home across the State. A review indicating a relatively higher neonatal mortality rate of babies born at term to mothers who had chosen a home birth in has led to a currently ongoing government review of home births. Recent excess deaths at homebirths in New South Wales may also influence future political decision-making.

Legal situation in Canada

Legality of homebirth currently is not the real issue. Coverage by Provinces public health service varies. Availability of doctors and midwives providing homebirth services also varies. Some Provinces appear to actively discourage homebirth. While other provinces are the opposite. Currently the Province of Ontario covers homebirth services as does British Columbia.

Famous homebirthers

Additional reading

• Spiritual Midwifery Ina May Gaskin(The Book Publishing Company) ISBN 1-57067-104-4 (1st edition 1977)
• A Wise Birth. Bringing together the best of natural childbirth with modern medicine, Armstrong P & Feldman S, 1990, reissued 2007, Pinter & Martin, ISBN 978-1-905177-03-5
• Having a Great Birth in Australia Ed David Vernon, Australian College of Midwives, Canberra, 2005 ISBN 0-9751674-3-X
• Home Birth: A Practical Guide, Wesson, Nicky, 2006, Pinter & Martin, ISBN 978-1-905177-06-6
• Lamaze Institute for Normal Birth

See also

• Childbirth
• Midwifery
• Doula
• Natural childbirth
• Nursing
• Pregnancy

External links

• Expert Group on Acute Maternity Services: Reference Report International Models of Maternity Care Report on maternity care released in Scotland, 2002, includes summary of how maternity care is dealt with in other countries besides the UK.
• Intrapartum Care Guidelines (2007) National Center for Health and Clinical Excellence, an independent health care monitoring organization in the UK, reviewing the home birth literature.
• Home Birth Reference Site, Index of Research on Home Birth
• American Pregnancy Association, Home Birth, brief article outlining the pros and cons of home birth
• World Health Organization, Care in Normal Birth: A practical guide, Chapter 2: General Aspects of Labor, 1997.
• ACOG Statement on Home Birth, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists reiterates its long-standing opposition to home births (Feb 8, 2008)

References

1. Studies monitoring transfers Home birth reference site. Accessed: Aug 24, 2008
2. General aspects of Care in Labour, WHO’s Care in normal birth: a practical guide, 1997
3. A History of Women's Bodies" Edward Shorter, Basic Books, 1982, p156
4. A History of Women's Bodies" Edward Shorter, Basic Books, 1982, p157
5. Martin JA, et al. “Births: Final Data for 2005” Vol 56, No 6. Dec 5, 2007.
6. http://news.netdoctor.co.uk/news_detail.php?id=17087027
7. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) National Perinatal Statistics Unit, 2008, Australia’s mothers and babies 2006, Perinatal statistics series no. 22, Cat. no. PER 46, Sydney, p. 20.
8. New Zealand Information Service, 2007, Report on Maternity Maternal and Newborn Information 2004, p. 64
9. Wiegers TA, et al. “Maternity Care in The Netherlands: the changing home birth rate (1998) Birth 25:190-197.
10. National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health as Commissioned by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Final Draft of Guideline on Intrapartum Care, (Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London, 22 March 2007)
11. Olsen O, JewellMD. Home versus hospital birth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1998, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD000352. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD000352.
12. ^ Woodcock HC, et al. (1994) Midwifery 10:125-135.
13. ^ Ackerman-Liebrich U, et al. (1996) BMJ 313:1313-1318.
14. Chamberlain G, et al. (1999) Pract Midwife 2:35. as summarized on the Home Birth Reference Site
15. ^ Janssen PA, et al. (2002) CMAJ 166:315-323.
16. Midwives Alliance of North America.
17. The Health Minister's controversial plan to encourage more home births.
22. ^ INFORMATION: Home Birth Pregnant Women
23. Charlotte Church Gives Birth to a Baby Girl - Birth, Charlotte Church: People.com
24. Ricki Lake: Ricki Lake On The Business Of Being Born - Living on The Huffington Post
25. My Journal: Labor of Love

• Misplaced Pages neutral point of view disputes from May 2009
• Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from April 2009
• Childbirth
• Midwifery
• Obstetrics