Support Midwifery in Massachusetts!

Massachusetts Senate Bill 847 will be heard at the State House on July 28. This bill, as it similarly does in 26 other states, protects midwives and their practice, as well as the women who choose to give birth with them and receive other well-woman care from them.

Right now, Nurse-Midwives are under the supervision of MD's, and this bill would give nurse-midwives the ability to practice collaboratively with MD's. Nurse-midwives are the only midwives who can legally attend births in Massachusetts.

Additionally, this bill will allow Massachusetts to license Professional Midwives, who are stringently licensed in 26 other states. Professional Midwives go through rigorous training and education in order to care for healthy, uncomplicated pregnant and laboring women in out-of-hospital settings, such as birth centers and private homes.

This bill will regulate the practices of both types of midwives so that they practice a standard of care that is SAFE.

Please get involved! Perhaps you received care from a midwife - at home, in a hospital, or at a birth center -- and can attest to the quality of the midwifery model of care. Maybe you, personally, would not choose care from a midwife or to have your baby in any place but a hospital, but you DO believe that the only way to ensure quality health care for women is through a variety of evidence-based care, dispensed by a variety of highly-skilled professionals. All women can support this bill, because it is NOT about natural birth vs. epidural, homebirth vs. hospital birth, or one woman being stronger/better/smarter/more concerned about her baby than another woman.

This bill is about mothers and babies being born safely.

*****************
Massachusetts Friends of Midwives asks: "If you can join us at the State House for the hearing, please do! Babies andsmall children are welcome participants on visits to MA Senators and Repsand are welcome in the Gallery during the hearing. Please use your judgment,however, as the day can be long (we will not know when during the day wewill be testifying). While we would love to have as many families as possible, we also realizethat sitting still for a couple of hours may not be in everyone's skill sets--adults included! For more information and updates, please check out the MFOM blog(www.mfom.org) . Thanks so much for everyone's ongoing support!"

.

Keep on Movin', Mama!

Henci Goer has blogged for Lamaze's Science and Sensibility this week about a small study that suggests the high value of freedom and variation of mobility for laboring women.

Combine this with the ACOG's recently revised guidelines about external fetal monitoring (EFM). As a doula, as a woman in labor, I have seen how the fetal monitor seriously impedes a woman's range of motion. Movement, particularly bending over or forward, can either pick up the mother's slower heartrate or lose a heartrate altogether. The sheer frustration can make a woman surrender to the bed, despite her primal instinct to move with her labor -- if her care providers haven't already forced her to stay there for the sake of that printed read-out. But the ACOG now states that "although EFM is the most common obstetric procedure today, unfortunately it hasn't reduced perinatal mortality or the risk of cerebral palsy. In fact, the rate of cerebral palsy has essentially remained the same since World War II despite fetal monitoring and all of our advancements in treatments and interventions. " The low-tech and far less restrictive intermittent use of doppler radar or fetoscope, typically used in out-of-hospital birth, relays reliable information about fetal heart rate.

All the more reason for mamas to keep moving.

.

Who's Birth Is It Anyway?

My customary closing, when I respond to an initial email from a woman looking for a birth doula, is "Enjoy the rest of your 40 or so weeks, and best wishes for a wonderful birth-day."

When we meet in person, I will start the conversation by asking "What are some of the ways you envision your birth?"

But who's birth is it, really? Isn't it the baby that is being born?

I admit I never gave much thought to this use of language until a friend was critical of someone else's homebirth. The woman blogged about her birth in heroic, Herculean terms, and my friend found it boastful. "It's just a notch in her belt," he argued. "And it shouldn't be about her. It should be about a healthy baby." His assumptions about the healthiness of homebirth aside, his feelings are only a reflection of the way birth is typically viewed: a medical event meant to be just barely endured. And if the birth is traumatic, the disappointment with the experience gets swept aside by saying "In the end, all that matters is a healthy baby."

Of course we all want a healthy baby. A healthy mother, too. But there are women who envision something different than a delivery that is done to them, under a cloud of fear and suffering. They want to experience the physiological process of birth: the wonder, the fear, the ecstacy, the pain, the awesome strength of her body's own power to thrust another human being into the world. Their babies will be born, and these mothers want to birth them.

To my clients, I wish them all a wonderful birth-day.


cross-posted on Massachusetts Friends of Midwives blog.

Women Must Be Informed, Political Collaborators in Their Own Care

Dr. Tiller's clinic in Witchita, KS, one of the few in the country that provides late-term abortions, is closing. With his murder, in addition to wiping out the life of a husband and father, the anti-choice movement has taken away women's access to critical, necessary services. And while the current political make-up shows that the anti-choice movement cannot overturn Roe v. Wade, Dr. Tiller's death is a reminder that all it takes is a sniper to reduce our choices even further. And since OB-GYN's aren't racing to provide abortion services at the risk of their own lives, Dr. Tiller's practice may not ever be replaced.

When I'm not a doula, I work as an abortion counselor. Although most of the women I meet with are between 4 and 7 weeks pregnant, the clinic where I work provides abortion services up until the 23rd week of pregnancy, which is the legal limit of abortion care in the state of Massachusetts.

Your reaction may be visceral, no doubt. At 23 weeks, abortion can be extremely difficult to understand or justify, and it is not uncommon to shake your head and say "I have a real problem with that," even if you are pro-choice. It is tempting, if not comforting, to separate yourself from a woman who would make this choice by assuming that she must be a monster. And I'll be honest and say that once I sat down with a woman who seemingly had no feelings about having an abortion in her 23rd week of pregnancy. It chilled me, her apparent lack of feeling. But many more times than just once, I have sat down with couples who are heartbroken: a routine ultrasound in the 20th week discovers massive deformities; an amniocentesis details profound genetic abnormalities that at are incompatible with all but the briefest of life, and suffering is certain; a doppler at 22 weeks returns no heartbeat, reducing a wanted and cherished baby into a diagnosis of fetal demise. And sometimes, due to the time it takes to run tests, or to the human inconsistencies of those who administer those tests, or the varying reliability of technology, a pregnant woman in those situations can be beyond 23 weeks. And so what do we do in the state of Massachusetts? We tell her she can deliver her dead, deformed, or doomed baby in a labor and delivery unit of a hospital -- which is as monstrous as it sounds -- or we recommend she travel immediately to one of the few clinics in the United States that can terminate her pregnancy. And with the death of Dr. Tiller and the closing of his clinic, there is now one less place where a woman in this delicate and devastating situation can go for care that is humane and treats her with dignity.

And on the other end of pregnancy, women are also losing choices in childbirth. In my line of work, I hear many birth stories from women, and the majority of them have the same eerie arc: first, induction; second, confinement to a bed; third, bone-crushing pain; finally, forced pushing while lying on their backs. Statistically, more than 30% of those stories end in c-section, and these are in pregnancies that had been normal, low-risk, and healthy. It's also the basic formula for reality birth shows on cable TV, where birth is boiled down to a medical event that skirts death practically every time.

VBACs are becoming harder to access, despite evidence that indicates that VBAC is lower risk than repeat C-section. Providers, among both OB's and L&D nurses, have attended fewer and fewer low-risk, healthy childbirths that are purposefully unmedicated and without interventions. What results over time is that if a laboring woman wants a natural birth, she could go to a hospital and have no medical professionals with the experience or willingness to support her desires. Birth centers are losing funding, and homebirth is either criminalized or unregulated in half of the US. In the other half of the country, the standards of care that do govern it are so limiting that its practice is nearly impossible but for a few renegade midwives who are essentially providing care without the benefit of professional support in case of a true obstetric emergency. Healthy women who could experience the normal physiological process of birth are beholden to the artificial constructs of time, liability, and television drama. The art of childbirth, and the choices that encourage birth as a safe, non-medical event, are being lost.

Unless we have a vision that is greater than the arguments of pro-life vs. pro-choice, homebirth vs. hospital, natural birth vs. epidural, we will lose what is truly at stake at the heart of these issues: choices. The quality of women's health care is dependent upon choices and access to qualified care providers, and women must expect no less than to be informed, political collaborators in their own care.

.

Your birth story is an important part of healthcare Reform

If you sought care from a Certified Professional Midwife during your pregnancy, or if you gave birth in an out-of-hospital setting, your story is symbolic of why maternity care reform is a critical part of health care reform.

Certified Professional Midwives decrease the c-section rate and provide women with individualized, nurturing care in their pregnancies, labor, and deliveries. Certified Professional Midwives are the ONLY birth professionals trained specifically in out-of-hospital birth.

The c-section rate is soaring, and women are losing choices in how they give birth. Please tell your birth story.

Time Magazine discusses homebirth

I found this online today. I'm not sure if it appears in the print version as well. Unfortunately, the article only mentions nurse-midwives, and it is a major oversight to omit the rigorous training of professional midwives who are licensed in 26 of our 50 states.

It has some sentences that seem promising enough at first glance: "Modern medicine can eliminate a lot of the risk (of childbirth)but in doing so, it can also turn what could be a joyous experience for the mother into the equivalent of an all-day appendectomy." But while the sentence acknowledges that many women are losing the joy of birth, the sentence doesn't acknowledge that modern medicine may create -- not eliminate -- risk in childbirth with unnecessary routine interventions and restrictive protocols. Also, deservedly categorized as "high-risk" are the premature births, but how many of those premature births could have been avoided had they not been caused by inductions before 42 weeks gestation, under the seductive guise that a scheduled birth is less stressful than a spontaneous one? Medically, a baby is full term at 37 weeks, but what if that baby wouldn't have been born until 41 if left on his own? That is 4 weeks his lungs would have had to mature in the safety of the uterus.

But the article does a good job highlighting some of the more-often discussed indications of why homebirth is a safe option, referring to the Oregon study and the British Medical Journal findings. It also makes a fair statement about why OB's may be "soured" on the entire concept of homebirth, as they only see the births that become complicated. OB's are never brought in on the homebirths that are progressing as normal, unmedicated, physiological labor should -- which is most of them! But combine that with our country's zeal for litigation, where there is zero tolerance for a less-than-perfect baby, it doesn't seem so unreasonable for an OB to be unsupportive of homebirth.

What I find most heartening, though, is that this article has appeared in Time -- hardly the publication of Radicals. Homebirth is slowly, slowly making its way into more and more women's menu of birthing options. Homebirth is also facing grave opposition, but I remain ever hopeful.

(cross-posted on the Massachusetts Friends of Midwives blog)

Great Videos on OPTIONS in childbirth

Virgina’s Birth Matters video contest is conjuring up creative juices — and giving us fantastic ways to let people know that there are MANY options to how you birth a child!! Here is Part One of South Coast Midwifery’s video, and when that’s done, you can watch Part Two. Southcoast Midwifery is in California, where it seems all of my midwifery books are based! Massachusetts will get there!

–maria
(this has been cross-posted on the Massachusetts Friends of Midwives blog)

.

MRSA infections at Beth Israel Hospital in Boston

Click the title above, and you'll be linked to an article about infection control at one of Boston's largest hospitals. The hospital was found in serious non-compliance with infection control protocols, resulting in staph and MRSA infections -- in mothers and their newborn babies in the labor, delivery, and maternity units.

I don't wish to bash the BI. Two of my three daughters were born there. I had good experiences there. I hadn't developed an interest yet in midwifery, doulas, and non-medicalized, normal birth; my care there was a good match for what I valued then. As I learned more about birth as a non-medical event, I chose not to return to BI for my 3rd daughter's birth, but I have no regrets about decisions I made in the past.

But the situation, which could probably happen in any hospital in the country, can prompt more discussion about out-of-hospital birth. A healthy woman with a healthy pregnancy who goes into labor spontaneously at term should have the right to a homebirth or non-hospital birth center with a qualified and trained midwife. In the comfort of her own home or in a home-like setting, with the intimacy of loved ones around her, she can move freely through labor, feed herself and drink to thirst as she needs to in order to maintain her strength, and allow her body to engage in the uninterrupted physiological process of childbirth. That kind of normal birth is not medical, so therefore doesn't need a hospital and the whole hospital package -- like infections due to non-compliance of infection control protocol, or medical interventions that are either unwanted or not truly medically necessary, which leads to further interventions, which can then create an emergency. At the risk of sounding prosaic, hospitals are for sick people.