The results of a study conducted in BC were recently released (about a week ago; I'm a little late to the plate on this one). The cases of three groups of women who were considered low-risk were compared: those who had planned hospital births with an obstetrician, those who had planned hospital births with midwives, and those who had planned homebirths with midwives. The numbers don't lie: perinatal mortality results were the same for homebirths as for hospital births, and homebirths had "reduced rates of obstetric interventions and other adverse perinatal outcomes compared with planned hospital birth attended by a midwife or physician."
What's particularly great about this study is that midwife-assisted hospital births were included in the study, thus eliminating the attendant from the equation. It cannot be argued that a hospital birth with a midwife is "just as good" as a homebirth. The fact is: they aren't. Outcomes are, by and large, better for homebirths.
Hopefully, the results of this study will help encourage professionals and legislators to support homebirth, and will provide women with some additional ammunition to assist them in convincing reticent spouses that homebirth is a safe and encouraging choice for birth.
No comments:
Post a Comment