Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Freebirthing

Cynthetiq · 07-04-2007, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

Your county stats match the NJ ones. I'd be willing to bet any other county or state stats from c1900-1915 would show a similar mortality rate of 32%-38%, an alarming amount when you think about it, but not unrealisitic under the (then) circumstances. Taking into consideration the however modest improvements of living conditions and medical advancement from, say, c1850-1900, one might conclude that those rates probably were closer to 50% in those decades. I'll have to Google some more

Cyn: you rock! Great charts

Ok, I Googled more and found this very comprehensive PDF: http://www.ncmedicaljournal.com/may-jun-04/ar050404.pdf

It states in part, that: In 1963, 31.1 out of every 1,000 babies born alive in NC died before their 1st birthday. There was no neonatal intensive care, no ventilators designed for preemies, no simple way to measure blood gases, and 'the role of continuous positive airway pressure and surfactant was not understood'. This was less than 50 years ago!!!!
The article goes on to address the advances in both medical and social services to pregnant women and their newborns.
I have to thank Ms. Hatch. We've all become much more educated on the impact of medical science and its role in keeping infant and mother mortality rates down as their overall health and longevity rates increase.

A great article, thanks ng.

Quote:

In 2002 there were 117,307 live births with 957 infant deaths for an infant mortality rate of 8.2, the lowest ever recorded in North Carolina. Clearly, the advances in medical knowledge and expertise, coupled with policy changes that made it easier to access prenatal care have helped to improve the state’s infant mortality rate. However, we cannot rest on these accomplishments. North Carolina still has a higher than average infant mortality rate. Nationally, there were seven infant deaths per 1,000 live births in 2002. Further, while North Carolina’s infant mortality rate has improved for all races, the infant mortality rate is still more than two times higher for minorities (14.2 per 1,000 live births) than whites (7.0 per
1,000 live births).

This paragraph has alot going on there, but I do want to state that to Jenny's point, what I bolded is something as I understand her position. I just disagree in the response and methodology of how to address it via the standards and practices of the freebirth movement. The data shows that infant mortality is higher in places where hospitals and doctor access is less. I cannot add midwives into the mix since I have yet to see facts about midwifery in Angola, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, but as I understand the freebirth movement those are limited as well.

Quote:

Despite the advances in care and treatment, many questions remain only partially answered. What causes prematurity? What causes birth defects? What causes SIDS? What causes racial disparity? We do know that healthy lifestyles help prevent prematurity. We know that adequate folic acid prevents neural tube defects. We do know that placing infants on their backs to sleep reduces the incidence of sudden infant death syndrome. We know that lifetimes of poverty, stress, and subclinical infections may contribute to racial disparity in birth outcomes.

This is quite important. It is what we all want right? We all want healthy happy babies who then eventually become healthy happy adults. None of us know definitively what or how that happens. There are just too many factors to count.

Quote:

Infant mortality rates that are thrown around to disprove homebirth are usually from the height of the Industrial Revolution and compiled at some teaching hospital in a big city, where women were notoriously undernourished and overworked. The fact that they also gave birth in a hospital during that time of no hand washing and no infrastructure in hospital for proper hygiene, also makes the stats suspect. London during the industrial revolution was a very dangerous place to birth a child, yet those stats are often used to compare and contrast the "progress" of medicine the past hundred years.

I didn't specifically address this quote with my infant mortality post. But I have to point out again, that you are injecting your emotional response into the findings. I will admit that your statement "makes the stats suspect" is an important thing. One should ALWAYS be suspect of statistics because as a couple other posters sapiens and abaya have discussed the challenges of interpreting those statistics.

Somehow this morning as I was walking into the living room, I had a revelation as to how your position is framed. While I respect you are a woman of faith, and I mean no disrespect in my presenting and equating this point.

During teen years those that are ill informed to pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases come up with some hair brained reasons and schemes. They don't have any data or knowledge of data to back up their claims, but they believe them vigorously. It does not take into account actual biology and how it works alot of the time. So their points of view can be supported by some anecdotal evidence of friends and friends of friends. Even small samples of statistics can even prove their point. We can even interject faith and emotion into the mix with "She won't get pregnant because I pull out," and "condoms aren't natural", "it feels so much better" and "we feel so much closer without using condoms."

But what remains is the possibility of pregnancy or catching some disease being greater than zero, and that is what I believe is the crux of this discussion so far.

Infants can and will die during and just after childbirth. The infant mortality rates support that. What we all are responsible for is our decisions. How we bring or not bring a child into this world.

I think that Tecoyah, a respected community member here put it very simply in the beginning:

Quote:

I am well aware of the freebirth concept Jenny, but I must say fanaticism serves no movement well. Many people choose a hospital for good reason, and should not be criticized for doing so, any more than you and I for choosing not too.

While I personally might agree with much of what you profess, the extremism you project would make me want to leave the room and disassociate. Congratulations on your choice, and the beautiful experience natural birth can be (I speak from experience), But an equal Congrats to Dawg for the Birthing she created. To each their own....Just enjoy the Kids.