Remy got new snow pants to match the jacket Auntie Val gave us last year. This means he will be able to continue playing outside.
As you can tell he is thrilled.Here he is in his new outfit from Nana.
Nana got a new job and celebrated by buying Remy a new outfit. I just love puffer vests and he is too stinkin' cute in his!Second I must apologize for my lack of posting. Have you missed me? Really I don't know what I've been doing that is keeping me from posting. Maybe I'm just losing interest?
Third - and what you've been waiting for - lets talk about home births.
Last night, while having dessert with some friends, home births came up. The result of that brief conversation was that I could hardly sleep last night because I couldn't stop thinking about it. In other words, I disagreed with someone and obsessed about it the rest of the night.
I am all for home births in most normal situations. My mom had her last two at home and I think enjoyed it more than the hospital. However, I think that unless it is physically impossible (due to your location) I think everyone should have their first baby at a hospital. Some women have unknown conditions that can cause them to hemorrhage after birth and unless they have immediate medical attention, it can lead to death. Calling an ambulance wouldn't do any good, by the time they got there it would be too late.
Some babies are born with birth defects or diseases that were not known previous to birth. I think about little Jonah. A midwife may not have known the care to give to him and may have caused more damage to his fragile little skin before a diagnosis was made. Some babies unexpectedly need ventilators or get brain damage due to loss of oxygen during labor and can die within the first 10 minutes without proper care. Emergency c-sections are sometimes needed because a baby is not getting oxygen or the mother is going into shock. In those cases every minute counts. Waiting 10 minutes for the ambulance to get there, another 10 minutes to get to the hospital and another 10 minutes to get admitted to the hospital can have devastating results.
I just don't think risking the mother or baby's life in an unknown situation is the smart thing to do. Once you have experienced labor, discovered if you can have a baby naturally (i.e. without a c-section) and do not have any post-labor problems (which are surprisingly common) I think it is a totally different ball game as far as home births go.
Having said all of that I should point out that the mortality rate for home births is the same, or even less, than hospital births. I believe a large part of this is that women who have babies at home typically have already had at least one child, know the drill and know that natural child birth is most definitely going to work for them.
But besides the life/death aspect of it, wouldn't it be just plain messy having a baby at home? I don't really want to wiping blood and mucus (sorry!) off of my bedroom furniture. I fainted in the shower while I lost a lot of blood after Remy's birth. Nic would have had to rescue me, while taking care of Remy and he would have had to clean up the mess (if the midwife had already left). I mean, hospitals are just so darn convenient! They help you take care of the baby, feed you, clean your room. So maybe that is part of my argument too... I like being a pampered American?
If we had not known that Remy was not getting oxygen during my labor and we continued on hour after hour waiting for him to squeeze through my hips, there is a very good chance he would be developmentally delayed or even brain damaged. Because we now know that I have a narrow pelvic arch and that my hips are almost too narrow for a head to fit through, if we have another baby it will be in a hospital where the baby can be monitored to ensure it is getting enough oxygen.
So I guess I am wondering what everyone out there thinks. Are you for home births? Against them? On the fence?
Although really I just wanted to write this to vent. I feel like now I've said what I needed to and I can stop arguing in my head about this. I hope I didn't offend anyone, least of all my parents, whom I have the utmost respect for because not only did they have their last two children at home but my dad actually delivered Eddy because the midwife didn't get there in time! How crazy is that!? I am for home births if you know what your doing.
UPDATED: When I discussed this briefly with my mom today she pointed out that her first baby, who died from a hospital accident, would still be alive if she had a home birth. Which doesn't at all go with my argument. *Sigh* so maybe I am wrong but I think I was more appalled by the ignorance of the guy who was saying that home births would be better because they are cheaper. In other words I don't necessarily disagree with him but for someone to blithely say "lets have a home birth!" when they have never been present at any birth and when they are not the person giving birth (this guy's wife does not want to give birth at home) I just think its ignorant.
4 comments:
Interesting post. Eric and I had kind of decided before Grace was born that we would have the first in the hospital then see probalby look into a home birth for any more kids. It is possible that if I had a midwife for Grace, she would have been delivered normaly. I have heard there are many midwives that will deliver breach babies and that many have good ways to turn them. If that would have been the case I would not have had to have a c-section for either her or Micah.
That said, I to am all for the convenience of a hospital birth. No mess and they take care of you and the baby (if you choose) 24 hours a day.
Interesting discussion topic!
Yay!! Thanks for posting your response. I agree with you. Mom just told me that if I had birthed at home a midwife would have had a couple different tricks for getting Remy out...maybe so.
I enjoyed reading your thoughts. :) I always like to hear your opinions. Not to put another nail in the coffin with Mom, but I have read that the U.S. has the highest amount of C-Sections and hospital births of the developed countries along with the highest infant mortality rate. That always makes me wonder...
That said, do you remember that I had group B strep with Jackson? Jackson would have risked an infection if I had not had an IV. We probably would have avoided the nightmare of labor that I had with him if I had had him at home, though. Then, when I was in labor with Tucker, the last thing that I wanted to do was leave the house.
It's different for everyone and obviously, as you put it, a "hot button question" :) I agree with you that a "Sid" style belief in home birth is probably not the right approach, though. Especially if his wife does not want to try a home birth.
This is my question about all the statistics as far as interventions and deaths go. If you have a high-risk pregnancy that will need a c-section, or need immediate medical attention or have a baby with a medical condition that has a slim chance of living once born....these scenarios have to happen in hospitals...so when these studies are done do they take out those deaths and those interventions? Because if you have a baby with a heart condition, or siamese twins or a million other conditions you are absolutely going to have that baby at a hospital where its chances of living are much bigger, but there are obviously times that medical advances still can't save the baby. Are these deaths still on the statistics for hospital deaths vs. home birth deaths or do they take them out. Did that make sense?
Post a Comment