Good News for Natural Birth

[Guest guest]

http://www.mercola.com/2005/sep/3/good_news_for_natural_birth.htm

 

Good News for Natural Birth

 

landmark study, published recently in British Medical Journal, has

found that natural birth at home, under the care of certified

practicing midwives (CPMs, also called direct-entry or

apprentice-trained midwives), is safe for healthy mothers and babies,

with much lower rates of medical interventions.

 

The study tracked over 5000 mothers who planned to give birth at home

under CPM care in the U.S. and Canada in 2000, and compared their

outcomes with low-risk mothers giving birth in hospital. The authors

looked at the numbers of babies dying around the time of birth, and

also at the use of medical interventions.

 

The Results

 

Around 12 percent of mothers required transfer to hospital after the

start of labour, around half for failure to progress, pain relief and

exhaustion. Most transfers happened before birth, and only 3.4 percent

of women required an emergency transfer at any stage.

 

Rates of intervention, compared to low-risk women giving birth in

hospital were

 

* Electronic fetal monitoring 9.6 percent compared to 84 percent

* Epidural 4.7 percent compared with 63 percent

* Induction of labour 9.6 percent compared with 21 percent

* Forceps or vacuum delivery 1.6 percent compared with 7.4 percent

* Episiotomy 2.1 percent compared with 33 percent

* Cesarean 3.7 percentcompared with 19 percent

 

The number of babies dying was 2/1000, which is comparable to most

other studies of homebirth, and to low-risk mothers giving birth in

hospital.

 

Over 97 percent of mothers reported that they were extremely or very

satisfied with the birth, and 89.7 percent were fully breastfeeding at

six weeks.

 

 

British Medical Journal June 18, 2005

 

Guest Comment by Dr. Sarah Buckley:

 

This is an important study for all women giving birth in the

twenty-first century, and their carer-providers. This is one of the

largest groups of low-technology births ever studied, and is also a

prospective study: that is, it followed women from early pregnancy,

when they booked with their midwife, and so could track all study

participants, giving comprehensive and reliable results.

 

These results show that birth outside of hospital, and therefore

without immediate access to medical technology, is not dangerous, as

we are often lead to believe. These mothers and babies enjoyed

excellent outcomes. They had low rates of mortality around the time of

birth, and also were spared the effects of unnecessary medical

intervention.

 

Giving birth at home helped these mothers to feel private, safe and

undisturbed. These are the conditions that all mammals need for an

easy and successful birth. Feeling private and emotionally safe allows

the mothers birth hormones to flow most effectively, which makes birth

as efficient and safe as possible for mother and baby.1

 

I hope this study encourages both mothers-to-be and their care

providers to realise that low-technology and out-of-hospital options

can be safe for mothers and babies.

 

1. Buckley SJ. Ecstatic birth - Nature's hormonal blueprint for

labour. Mothering March/April 2002

 

Sarah J Buckley, MD, is a writer and expert in pregnancy, birth and

parenting. You can find out more from her website.

 

 

 

Related Articles:

 

Modern Birth Centers Find Alternative Birth Methods Safe and Effective

 

Learn Why Having a Baby Naturally is Best

 

Natural Birthing Options: Technology in Birth -- First Do No Harm

 

Return to Tabl