Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ShaniFaye
Having had a baby I can tell you right now, no way in hell I would want to be "alone". There are way too many things that can go wrong....even a midwife can turn a baby if its breech. What woman in their right mind would WANT to be laying in her bed ALONE trying to give birth to a backwards baby? Those labors go nowhere very slowly. I can certainly understand wanting to have it at home, while that wouldnt be my choice because I would much rather give both me and my baby the benefit of medical attention if something went wrong, for god's sake have someone there who knows about the birthing process.
Sure women of another time did it, but the mortality rate for both them and the baby was a lot higher and its just stupid to take that risk
|
Quoted for emphasis.
Had I not had my doctor, I would have definitely lost my son and quite possibly my daughter as well in my 3rd month, again in my 6th and again during birth.
The statistic that Lurkette quoted was 1 in 100
live births, not women, which means that, statistically, if 20 women each had 5 pregnancies, one of them would die by the 5th kid. And given that women more than likely did have 5 or more kids back before the earlier 20th century, that is not a very good statistic.
This is another nose-thumbing at the 'establishment' fad, much like the water births of about 10 years ago, where women attempted to give birth in a tub of water. At least one baby drowned and probably more did as well and we don't hear anything of that anymore.
There's a huge difference between 'natural' childbirth and idiocy. I'd really recommend those who would choose to do this take a trip to any 3rd world country and check out some moms and kids who weren't assisted. It'd be an eye-opener.