Dear Friends,
As many of you may have heard, a very large study of home birth in the Netherlands was just published last week. The abstract is below, as well as the link to the abstract on the website of BJOG (an International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology). The study concludes that giving birth at home is as safe as hospital (if the birth is planned, with a well-trained midwife, and there is adequate transportation to and communication with medical services). It anticipates a similar study out of the UK that will be forthcoming. Mary Newburn, head of research and information at the National Childbirth Trust, commented that the study "makes a significant contribution to the growing body of reassuring evidence that suggests offering women a choice of place of birth is entirely appropriate."
Molly previously posted some additional links regarding this study. A comment to Rixa's blog included a link to a letter to the editor of the British Medical Journal from Madeleine Akrich, PhD and Bernard Bel, PhD, Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance), that included these comments:
"We do share Visser & Steegers' concern about high transfer rates in low-risk births. As suggested in their paper, bad rates point at the detrimental effect of discontinuity of care, rather than at unforeseen serious complications. In their words, "healthy pregnant women need care, not cure."
"Besides, the transfer rates of home births seem to be rising in the Netherlands. They were 40% and 9% for nulliparae and multiparae respectively in 2002. It is also significant that these rates were even higher from polyclinics to hospital: 43% and 19% respectively, as deducted from the enclosed graphs. (The leftmost bars indicate home and polyclinic births and the central ones indicate transfers from home and from polyclinics.)
"Midwives comment that they feel more under pressure to accelerate labour when working closer to "the machines". This observation remains consistent with the conclusions of Wiegers and colleagues comparing midwifery practice at home and in hospitals: Outcome of planned home and planned hospital births in low risk pregnancies: prospective study in midwifery practices in the Netherlands (TA. Wiegers, MJNC. Keirse, J. van der Zee, GAH. Berghs). BMJ 1996;313:1309-1313"
The bottom line is that the vast majority of women, especially for first births, benefit from continuous support during labor, not more medical attention.
In addition, you may also find it useful to read CfM's article about ACOG and the AMA here and a discussion of "safety" here.
Sincerely,
Arielle Greenberg Bywater and Susan Hodges
Article Citation:
de Jonge A, van der Goes B, Ravelli A, Amelink-Verburg M, Mol B, Nijhuis J, Bennebroek Gravenhorst J, Buitendijk S. Perinatal mortality and morbidity in a nationwide cohort of 529 688 low-risk planned home and hospital births. BJOG 2009. Accepted 26 February 2009. Published Online 15 April 2009.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To compare perinatal mortality and severe perinatal morbidity between planned home and planned hospital births, among low-risk women who started their labour in primary care.
Design: A nationwide cohort study.
Setting: The entire Netherlands.
Population: A total of 529 688 low-risk women who were in primary midwife-led care at the onset of labour. Of these, 321 307 (60.7%) intended to give birth at home, 163 261 (30.8%) planned to give birth in hospital and for 45 120 (8.5%), the intended place of birth was unknown.
Methods: Analysis of national perinatal and neonatal registration data, over a period of 7 years. Logistic regression analysis was used to control for differences in baseline characteristics. Main outcome measures Intrapartum death, intrapartum and neonatal death within 24 hours after birth, intrapartum and neonatal death within 7 days and neonatal admission to an intensive care unit.
Results: No significant differences were found between planned home and planned hospital birth (adjusted relative risks and 95% confidence intervals: intrapartum death 0.97 (0.69 to 1.37), intrapartum death and neonatal death during the first 24 hours 1.02 (0.77 to 1.36), intrapartum death and neonatal death up to 7 days 1.00 (0.78 to 1.27), admission to neonatal intensive care unit 1.00 (0.86 to 1.16).
Conclusions: This study shows that planning a home birth does not increase the risks of perinatal mortality and severe perinatal morbidity among low-risk women, provided the maternity care system facilitates this choice through the availability of well-trained midwives and through a good transportation and referral system.
================================================
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query netherlands. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query netherlands. Sort by date Show all posts
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Friday, October 9, 2009
PBS Newshour Segment Referencing Homebirth
A great piece on home birth and health care reform was done on PBS’ McNeil Lehrer Newhour on (10/7). They featured the Netherlands and talked about home birth as part of the country’s cost savings and quality care. They mentioned how low their neonatal mortality is compared to the US. Really a good plug for home birth without the show being about that topic. Go to this link to see the transcript or you can download the segment titled “Health Care in The Netherlands.” It is vastly better than the recent Today show piece. Just as birth advocates organized to decry the terrible reporting of the TODAY show, we should work to thank the “Newshour” for their positive coverage of this topic. If people want to thank the McNeil Lehrer Newshour for their excellent coverage, you can give feedback here: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/letters.html.
--
Molly
CfM Blogger
--
Molly
CfM Blogger
Monday, July 14, 2008
Dutch journalist comments on homebirth
Amongst all the news related to the AMA, it was interesting to see midwifery in Missouri referenced in an unlikely article. The article is about a Dutch journalist and how he handles his "beat" of covering news throughout the U.S. (right now writing about politics and presidential campaigns, etc.) Then, midway through the article are his comments with regard to homebirth and midwifery in MO:
"I try to go to whatever place a normal reader would never come to, like St. Peters, Missouri," he says.
Earlier Wednesday he had been in Blackwater, population 199, near Columbia, to talk to a woman who will shortly give birth to her third child.
"And she wants to do that with the help of a midwife," Tom says. He also interviewed the midwife.
The 2007 Missouri law that legalized midwifery was upheld in June by the state Supreme Court.
Midwifery is more common in the Netherlands, Tom says.
"My two kids were born with the help of the midwives," he says.
Earlier on his I-70 trip, Tom stopped in El Dorado, Kan., where Obama's grandfather grew up.
Also in Kansas, he interviewed two lesbian women who live in rural Kansas.
"It's part of my story on cultural wars," he says."...
-------------------------------------------
I thought it was fun to see this midwifery news mingled in with all of the other subjects mentioned in the article!
"I try to go to whatever place a normal reader would never come to, like St. Peters, Missouri," he says.
Earlier Wednesday he had been in Blackwater, population 199, near Columbia, to talk to a woman who will shortly give birth to her third child.
"And she wants to do that with the help of a midwife," Tom says. He also interviewed the midwife.
The 2007 Missouri law that legalized midwifery was upheld in June by the state Supreme Court.
Midwifery is more common in the Netherlands, Tom says.
"My two kids were born with the help of the midwives," he says.
Earlier on his I-70 trip, Tom stopped in El Dorado, Kan., where Obama's grandfather grew up.
Also in Kansas, he interviewed two lesbian women who live in rural Kansas.
"It's part of my story on cultural wars," he says."...
-------------------------------------------
I thought it was fun to see this midwifery news mingled in with all of the other subjects mentioned in the article!
Friday, July 17, 2009
Homebirth in the Hospital
I recently finished reading a new book called Homebirth in the Hospital (watch for my full review in the fall issue of CfM News). The book proposes an "integrative" model of childbirth--integrating natural childbirth with modern medicine. Interestingly, immediately after finishing the book I happened to come across the website of an OB practice in New York City called Village Obstetrics. With the tagline "minimally invasive obstetrics," this practice seems to be exactly the sort of integrative practice proposed by Stacey Marie Kerr in her book. I thought it was a neat coincidence. I was especially interested in the practice statistics on the Village OB site--they are excellent! (And it goes to show that when providers are proud of their stats, they have no trouble sharing them. It is a red flag if you ask a practitioner about their stats and they "aren't sure" or an unwilling to reveal them to you.) Without including scheduled cesareans (which appeared to be for legitimate reasons), they have a 6% cesarean rate (+ an additional 15% for various reasons)!
The Homebirth in the Hospital book doesn't address statistics specifically, but I assume physicians following that model would have similar, lower rates of interventions. (Do note that there are other things on the Village OB site, such as encouragement of continuous monitoring, that do not seem consistent with an integrative model.)
I finished the book (and the OB practice's site) feeling like a "homebirth" in a hospital is most definitely not for me (not really enough like homebirth at all!), but also feeling glad and optimistic that there are medical care providers out there who are seeking to practice in integrative ways that respect birth and women. I also am fully aware that the vast majority of American women give birth in hospitals and I think we desperately need other hospital-based healthy birth options to meet those women's needs!
I was also reminded of a section in the book Birthwork that addresses complementary care:
--
Molly
CfM Blogger
The Homebirth in the Hospital book doesn't address statistics specifically, but I assume physicians following that model would have similar, lower rates of interventions. (Do note that there are other things on the Village OB site, such as encouragement of continuous monitoring, that do not seem consistent with an integrative model.)
I finished the book (and the OB practice's site) feeling like a "homebirth" in a hospital is most definitely not for me (not really enough like homebirth at all!), but also feeling glad and optimistic that there are medical care providers out there who are seeking to practice in integrative ways that respect birth and women. I also am fully aware that the vast majority of American women give birth in hospitals and I think we desperately need other hospital-based healthy birth options to meet those women's needs!
I was also reminded of a section in the book Birthwork that addresses complementary care:
Parents who have quite comfortably given birth naturally and taken responsibility for their health are often perplexed by the zeal with which the medical model is upheld and promoted...Conversely, ardent natural birth activists can similarly perplex and infuriate those who have been grateful for necessary medical help their received when they gave birth in a hospital.This section also reminded me of the recent study from the Netherlands about the safety of homebirth and how their maternity care system is is much more cooperative than we see here as it promotes access to midwifery as well as a good transportation and referral system (which necessitates working, egalitarian relationships between care providers).
Like all great systems of belief, the revelations and tools of borth modern medical birth and natural birth are there to be embraced by those who choose to embrace them, and to be kindly offered to those who may benefit from them. We need to begin by negotiating the confusion that exists around the availability and right to medical help for a planned natural birth, and the availability and right to birth naturally within a medical setting. Rather than insisting on one right away, we need to appreciate that different systems of care can be complementary and helpful to one another. They can work together.
--
Molly
CfM Blogger
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Vitamin D and Cesareans
Several people have sent me a link to news articles about a recent study linking Vitamin D Deficiency to Increased C-Section Rate.
Amy Romano, blogging as a guest on the Giving Birth with Confidence blog, has a really fabulous analysis of the study: Rotating Theories of the Increasing C-section Rate: Vitamin D Edition
Her conclusion is particularly astute:
"Another red flag for bias? One of the study’s four authors is a paid consultant to none other than Quest Diagnostics, the company that made me listen to an ad for vitamin D blood testing while I was on hold.
Debunking this study doesn’t mean that vitamin D deficiency is harmless or that there aren’t other potential public health benefits to preventing and treating vitamin D deficiency in pregnant women. But we need a lot more information before we start blaming the increasing cesarean rate on vitamin D. It’s tempting in the face of a cesarean epidemic to assume that women’s bodies are deficient in something or another, or to just assume that women are asking for it. These theories direct attention away from the systemic problems that keep the cesarean rate marching higher and higher."
Speaking of the Giving Birth with Confidence blog, Amy also has an in-depth post there looking at the new homebirth study from the Netherlands that concluded giving birth at home is at least as safe as giving birth in the hospital. Rixa at Stand and Deliver also has a good post about this homebirth study, including lots of links to the difference media coverage of it. Make sure to check these out!
--
Molly
CfM Blogger
Amy Romano, blogging as a guest on the Giving Birth with Confidence blog, has a really fabulous analysis of the study: Rotating Theories of the Increasing C-section Rate: Vitamin D Edition
Her conclusion is particularly astute:
"Another red flag for bias? One of the study’s four authors is a paid consultant to none other than Quest Diagnostics, the company that made me listen to an ad for vitamin D blood testing while I was on hold.
Debunking this study doesn’t mean that vitamin D deficiency is harmless or that there aren’t other potential public health benefits to preventing and treating vitamin D deficiency in pregnant women. But we need a lot more information before we start blaming the increasing cesarean rate on vitamin D. It’s tempting in the face of a cesarean epidemic to assume that women’s bodies are deficient in something or another, or to just assume that women are asking for it. These theories direct attention away from the systemic problems that keep the cesarean rate marching higher and higher."
Speaking of the Giving Birth with Confidence blog, Amy also has an in-depth post there looking at the new homebirth study from the Netherlands that concluded giving birth at home is at least as safe as giving birth in the hospital. Rixa at Stand and Deliver also has a good post about this homebirth study, including lots of links to the difference media coverage of it. Make sure to check these out!
--
Molly
CfM Blogger
Friday, September 25, 2009
CIMS Letter to The Today Show
Citizens for Midwifery was pleased to join with many other birth organizations as a signer of the well-crafted and intelligent letter composed by CIMS in response to The Today Show "Perils of Midwifery segment recently aired. You can read this "One Voice" response as a pdf file here. The letter is also reprinted below:
Sept. 22, 2009
Dear Producers of The Today Show,
The Coalition for Improving Maternity Services (CIMS) and the undersigned organizations are disappointed with The Today Show’s misrepresentation of midwives and home birth that aired on Sept. 11, in a segment titled “The Perils of Midwifery,” later changed to “The Perils of Home Birth.” This biased and sensational segment inaccurately implied that hospitals are the safest place to give birth even for low-risk women and mischaracterized women who choose a home birth with a midwife as "hedonistic," going so far as to suggest that these women are putting their birth experiences above the safety of their babies. Neither could be further from the truth.
Unfortunately, The Today Show did not do its homework on the evidence regarding the safety of home birth and midwifery care. The segment featured an obstetrician who presented only the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ (ACOG) position in opposition to home birth, but it did not make any attempt to present the different viewpoints held by the many organizations that are committed to improving the quality of maternity care in the US. We are deeply saddened that the show did not take the opportunity to note that both CIMS and The National Perinatal Association respect the rights of women to choose home births and midwifery care, and that the respected Cochrane Collaboration recommends midwifery care because it results in excellent outcomes.
There is no evidence to support the ACOG position that hospital birth for low-risk women is safer than giving birth with midwives at home. What the research does show is that the routine use of medical interventions in childbirth without medical necessity can cause more harm than good, while also inflating the cost of childbirth. However, the current health system design offers little incentive for physicians and hospitals to improve access to maternity care practices that have been proven to maximize maternal and infant health.
“Birth is safest when midwives and doctors work together respectfully, communicate well, and when a transfer from home to hospital is needed, it is appropriately handled,” says Ruth Wilf, CNM, PhD, a member of the CIMS Leadership Team.
That is why the national health services of countries such as Britain, Ireland, Canada, and the Netherlands support home birth. In those countries, midwives are respected and integrated into the maternity care system. They work collaboratively with physicians in or out of the hospital, and they are not the target of modern day witch hunts. These countries have better outcomes for mothers and babies than the US.
Childbirth is the leading reason for admission to US hospitals, and hospitalization is the most costly health care component. Combined hospital charges for birthing women and newborns ($75,187,000,000 in 2004) far exceed charges for any other condition. In 2004, fully 27% of hospital charges to Medicaid and 16% of charges to private insurance were for birthing women and newborns, the most expensive conditions for both payers. The burden on public budgets, taxpayers and employers is considerable.
As US birth outcomes continue to worsen, it should come as no surprise to The Today Show that childbearing women are seeking alternatives to standard maternity care. After all, American women and babies are paying the highest price of all—their health—for these unnecessary interventions, which include increasing rates of elective inductions of labor and cesarean sections without medical indication.
To the detriment of childbearing families, the segment “The Perils of Midwifery” totally disregarded the evidence. Although the reporters acknowledged that research shows home birth for low-risk women is safe, that message was overshadowed by many negative messages, leaving viewers with a biased perception of midwifery care and home birth. CIMS makes these points not to promote the interests of any particular profession, but rather to raise a strong voice in support of maternity care practices that promote the health and well-being of mothers and babies.
One of the ten Institute of Medicine recommendations for improving health care is to provide consumers with evidence-based information in order to help them make informed decisions. The Institute recommends that decisions be made by consumers, not solely by health care providers. The Institute maintains that transparency and true choice are essential to improving health care. We remain hopeful that the medical community will soon recognize the rights of childbearing women when it comes to their choices in childbirth and will respect and support these choices in the interest of the best possible continuity and coordination of care for all.
We urge The Today Show to provide childbearing women with fair and accurate coverage of this important issue by giving equal time to midwives, public health professionals, researchers of evidence- based maternity care, and especially to parents who have made choices about different models of care and places of birth.
Sincerely,
Coalition for Improving Maternity Services
Academy of Certified Birth Educators
Alaska Birth Network
Alaska Family Health and Birth Center
American Association of Birth Centers
American College of Community Midwives
American College of Nurse-Midwives
Bay Area Birth Information
Birth Network of Santa Cruz County
Birth Works International
Birthing From Within, LLC
BirthNet
BirthNetwork National
BirthNetwork of Idaho Falls
BirthNetwork of NW Arkansas
Choices in Childbirth
Citizens for Midwifery
DONA International
Doulas Association of Southern California
Evansville BirthNetwork
Harmony Birth & Family
Idaho Midwifery Council
Idahoans for Midwives
InJoy Birth and Parenting Education
International Childbirth Education Association
International MotherBaby Childbirth Organization
Lamaze International
Madison Birth Center
Midwives Alliance of North America
Motherbaby International Film Festival
Nashville BirthNetwork
National Association of Certified Professional Midwives
North American Registry of Midwives
Oklahoma BirthNetwork
Perinatal Education Associates, Inc.
Reading Birth & Women's Center
Rochester Area Birth Network
Sage Femme
The Big Push for Midwives Campaign
The Tatia Oden French Memorial Foundation
Triangle Birth Network
Truckee Meadows BirthNetwork
About Us
The Coalition for Improving Maternity Services (CIMS) is a coalition of individuals and national organizations with concern for the care and wellbeing of mothers, babies, and families. Our mission is to promote a wellness model of maternity care that will improve birth outcomes and substantially reduce costs. The CIMS Mother-Friendly Childbirth Initiative is an evidence-based mother-, baby-, and family- friendly model of care which focuses on prevention and wellness as the alternatives to high-cost screening, diagnosis, and treatment programs.
References:
1. The Perils of Home Births, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/32795933#32795933
2. Birth Can Safely Take Place at Home and in Birthing Centers,
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=2409129&blobtype=pdf
3. Offers All Birthing Mothers Unrestricted Access to Birth Companions, Labor Support, Professional Midwifery Care, http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=2409134&blobtype=pdf
4. ACOG Place of Birth Policies Limit Women's Choices Without Justification and Contrary to the Evidence, http://childbirthconnection.com/article.aspClickedLink=790&ck=10465&area=27
5. Ratifiers and Endorsers of The Mother-Friendly Childbirth Initiative,
http://www.motherfriendly.org/ratifiers.php
6. Choice of Birth Setting, http://www.nationalperinatal.org/advocacy/pdf/Choice-of-Birth-Setting.pdf
7. Position Statement on Midwifery, http://www.nationalperinatal.org/advocacy/pdf/Midwifery.pdf
8. Midwife-led versus other models of care for childbearing women,
http://cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab004667.html
9. Evidence-Based Maternity Care: What It Is And What It Can Achieve,
http://childbirthconnection.com/pdfs/evidence-based-maternity-care.pdf
10. Lamaze Healthy Birth Practices,
http://www.lamaze.org/ChildbirthProfessionals/ResourcesforProfessionals/CarePracticePapers/tabid/90/Default.aspx
11. Millennium Development Goals Indicators, United Nations, http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Data.aspx
12. National Vital Statistics System, Birth Data, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/births.htm
13. Induction By Request, http://www.marchofdimes.com/prematurity/21239_20203.asp
14. Cesarean Birth By Request, http://www.marchofdimes.com/prematurity/21239_19673.asp
15. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century,
http://www.iom.edu/CMS/8089/5432.aspx
16. The Mother-Friendly Childbirth Initiative, http://www.motherfriendly.org/mfci.php
Coalition for Improving Maternity Services
1500 Sunday Drive, Suite 102
Raleigh, NC 27607
Tel: 919-863-9482
Fax: 919-787-4916
www.MotherFriendly.org
Making Mother-Friendly Care A Reality
CIMS is a not-for-profit organization recognized as tax-exempt under Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3). Our mission is to promote a wellness model of maternity care that will improve birth outcomes and substantially reduce costs.
Sept. 22, 2009
Dear Producers of The Today Show,
The Coalition for Improving Maternity Services (CIMS) and the undersigned organizations are disappointed with The Today Show’s misrepresentation of midwives and home birth that aired on Sept. 11, in a segment titled “The Perils of Midwifery,” later changed to “The Perils of Home Birth.” This biased and sensational segment inaccurately implied that hospitals are the safest place to give birth even for low-risk women and mischaracterized women who choose a home birth with a midwife as "hedonistic," going so far as to suggest that these women are putting their birth experiences above the safety of their babies. Neither could be further from the truth.
Unfortunately, The Today Show did not do its homework on the evidence regarding the safety of home birth and midwifery care. The segment featured an obstetrician who presented only the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ (ACOG) position in opposition to home birth, but it did not make any attempt to present the different viewpoints held by the many organizations that are committed to improving the quality of maternity care in the US. We are deeply saddened that the show did not take the opportunity to note that both CIMS and The National Perinatal Association respect the rights of women to choose home births and midwifery care, and that the respected Cochrane Collaboration recommends midwifery care because it results in excellent outcomes.
There is no evidence to support the ACOG position that hospital birth for low-risk women is safer than giving birth with midwives at home. What the research does show is that the routine use of medical interventions in childbirth without medical necessity can cause more harm than good, while also inflating the cost of childbirth. However, the current health system design offers little incentive for physicians and hospitals to improve access to maternity care practices that have been proven to maximize maternal and infant health.
“Birth is safest when midwives and doctors work together respectfully, communicate well, and when a transfer from home to hospital is needed, it is appropriately handled,” says Ruth Wilf, CNM, PhD, a member of the CIMS Leadership Team.
That is why the national health services of countries such as Britain, Ireland, Canada, and the Netherlands support home birth. In those countries, midwives are respected and integrated into the maternity care system. They work collaboratively with physicians in or out of the hospital, and they are not the target of modern day witch hunts. These countries have better outcomes for mothers and babies than the US.
Childbirth is the leading reason for admission to US hospitals, and hospitalization is the most costly health care component. Combined hospital charges for birthing women and newborns ($75,187,000,000 in 2004) far exceed charges for any other condition. In 2004, fully 27% of hospital charges to Medicaid and 16% of charges to private insurance were for birthing women and newborns, the most expensive conditions for both payers. The burden on public budgets, taxpayers and employers is considerable.
As US birth outcomes continue to worsen, it should come as no surprise to The Today Show that childbearing women are seeking alternatives to standard maternity care. After all, American women and babies are paying the highest price of all—their health—for these unnecessary interventions, which include increasing rates of elective inductions of labor and cesarean sections without medical indication.
To the detriment of childbearing families, the segment “The Perils of Midwifery” totally disregarded the evidence. Although the reporters acknowledged that research shows home birth for low-risk women is safe, that message was overshadowed by many negative messages, leaving viewers with a biased perception of midwifery care and home birth. CIMS makes these points not to promote the interests of any particular profession, but rather to raise a strong voice in support of maternity care practices that promote the health and well-being of mothers and babies.
One of the ten Institute of Medicine recommendations for improving health care is to provide consumers with evidence-based information in order to help them make informed decisions. The Institute recommends that decisions be made by consumers, not solely by health care providers. The Institute maintains that transparency and true choice are essential to improving health care. We remain hopeful that the medical community will soon recognize the rights of childbearing women when it comes to their choices in childbirth and will respect and support these choices in the interest of the best possible continuity and coordination of care for all.
We urge The Today Show to provide childbearing women with fair and accurate coverage of this important issue by giving equal time to midwives, public health professionals, researchers of evidence- based maternity care, and especially to parents who have made choices about different models of care and places of birth.
Sincerely,
Coalition for Improving Maternity Services
Academy of Certified Birth Educators
Alaska Birth Network
Alaska Family Health and Birth Center
American Association of Birth Centers
American College of Community Midwives
American College of Nurse-Midwives
Bay Area Birth Information
Birth Network of Santa Cruz County
Birth Works International
Birthing From Within, LLC
BirthNet
BirthNetwork National
BirthNetwork of Idaho Falls
BirthNetwork of NW Arkansas
Choices in Childbirth
Citizens for Midwifery
DONA International
Doulas Association of Southern California
Evansville BirthNetwork
Harmony Birth & Family
Idaho Midwifery Council
Idahoans for Midwives
InJoy Birth and Parenting Education
International Childbirth Education Association
International MotherBaby Childbirth Organization
Lamaze International
Madison Birth Center
Midwives Alliance of North America
Motherbaby International Film Festival
Nashville BirthNetwork
National Association of Certified Professional Midwives
North American Registry of Midwives
Oklahoma BirthNetwork
Perinatal Education Associates, Inc.
Reading Birth & Women's Center
Rochester Area Birth Network
Sage Femme
The Big Push for Midwives Campaign
The Tatia Oden French Memorial Foundation
Triangle Birth Network
Truckee Meadows BirthNetwork
About Us
The Coalition for Improving Maternity Services (CIMS) is a coalition of individuals and national organizations with concern for the care and wellbeing of mothers, babies, and families. Our mission is to promote a wellness model of maternity care that will improve birth outcomes and substantially reduce costs. The CIMS Mother-Friendly Childbirth Initiative is an evidence-based mother-, baby-, and family- friendly model of care which focuses on prevention and wellness as the alternatives to high-cost screening, diagnosis, and treatment programs.
References:
1. The Perils of Home Births, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/32795933#32795933
2. Birth Can Safely Take Place at Home and in Birthing Centers,
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=2409129&blobtype=pdf
3. Offers All Birthing Mothers Unrestricted Access to Birth Companions, Labor Support, Professional Midwifery Care, http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=2409134&blobtype=pdf
4. ACOG Place of Birth Policies Limit Women's Choices Without Justification and Contrary to the Evidence, http://childbirthconnection.com/article.aspClickedLink=790&ck=10465&area=27
5. Ratifiers and Endorsers of The Mother-Friendly Childbirth Initiative,
http://www.motherfriendly.org/ratifiers.php
6. Choice of Birth Setting, http://www.nationalperinatal.org/advocacy/pdf/Choice-of-Birth-Setting.pdf
7. Position Statement on Midwifery, http://www.nationalperinatal.org/advocacy/pdf/Midwifery.pdf
8. Midwife-led versus other models of care for childbearing women,
http://cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab004667.html
9. Evidence-Based Maternity Care: What It Is And What It Can Achieve,
http://childbirthconnection.com/pdfs/evidence-based-maternity-care.pdf
10. Lamaze Healthy Birth Practices,
http://www.lamaze.org/ChildbirthProfessionals/ResourcesforProfessionals/CarePracticePapers/tabid/90/Default.aspx
11. Millennium Development Goals Indicators, United Nations, http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Data.aspx
12. National Vital Statistics System, Birth Data, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/births.htm
13. Induction By Request, http://www.marchofdimes.com/prematurity/21239_20203.asp
14. Cesarean Birth By Request, http://www.marchofdimes.com/prematurity/21239_19673.asp
15. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century,
http://www.iom.edu/CMS/8089/5432.aspx
16. The Mother-Friendly Childbirth Initiative, http://www.motherfriendly.org/mfci.php
Coalition for Improving Maternity Services
1500 Sunday Drive, Suite 102
Raleigh, NC 27607
Tel: 919-863-9482
Fax: 919-787-4916
www.MotherFriendly.org
Making Mother-Friendly Care A Reality
CIMS is a not-for-profit organization recognized as tax-exempt under Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3). Our mission is to promote a wellness model of maternity care that will improve birth outcomes and substantially reduce costs.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
BBC Articles
I wanted to share links to two articles that I accessed on the BBC News website today. The first, Home births 'as safe as hospital', shares that "The largest study of its kind has found that for low-risk women, giving birth at home is as safe as doing so in hospital with a midwife. Research from the Netherlands - which has a high rate of home births - found no difference in death rates of either mothers or babies in 530,000 births."
The second was originally published last month: Women 'unprepared for childbirth'. From the article's opener: "Many women are going into labour vastly underestimating how painful it can be and overly optimistic that they will be able to manage without drugs, a study suggests. How has this happened?"
As a childbirth educator, I definitely have lots of thoughts about this. In fact, there is a very telling segment later in the article: "Much evidence suggests, however, that women who are well supported by midwives and partners throughout their labour and made to feel at ease are the ones who manage their pain the most effectively and require the fewest drugs."
My short take on the question "How has this happened?" is that many hospitals simply do not support the six care practices that support normal birth (care practices that greatly add to women's ability to cope with labor) and that women's access to the Midwives Model of Care is very limited!
--
Molly
CfM Blogger
The second was originally published last month: Women 'unprepared for childbirth'. From the article's opener: "Many women are going into labour vastly underestimating how painful it can be and overly optimistic that they will be able to manage without drugs, a study suggests. How has this happened?"
As a childbirth educator, I definitely have lots of thoughts about this. In fact, there is a very telling segment later in the article: "Much evidence suggests, however, that women who are well supported by midwives and partners throughout their labour and made to feel at ease are the ones who manage their pain the most effectively and require the fewest drugs."
My short take on the question "How has this happened?" is that many hospitals simply do not support the six care practices that support normal birth (care practices that greatly add to women's ability to cope with labor) and that women's access to the Midwives Model of Care is very limited!
--
Molly
CfM Blogger
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
