I agree - a good result is the prime goal. We all put the health of our baby at the top of the list - and hopefully, of ourselves too. But how about a good <i>process</i>, too! I think that's worth some activism!  (Whatever that means to the lady in question)

Pain is a way to bond eh?  Sounds to me like the Dutch just dont want to foot the bill for those drugs.  Have them at home, eh?  Hmmm, it does save the state a lot of money if you stay home rather than go to a hospital.  I love they way they try to make it sound traditional and natural but it is all about the almighty buck!  If Blue Cross and Aetna could they would spout the same shit.  "Women dont need health care.  Their pain and suffering are natural.  Women should suffer if they want to be mothers.  They should also die from ruptures, bleeding and stroke too.  If they survive they can always have another baby if that one dies.  It's natural!"  The same should be said about Viagra and Levitra.  It is natural for old men to not be able to get it up.  Why bother with meds?  Their impotence makes them better gramppas.

What if you have unexpected complications during your delivery? And what if mother or baby dies because they weren't able to get emergency care fast enough?

While I like the idea of a baby nurse to help the first week, I wouldn't appreciate being denied pain meds because pain is considered a way to bond with baby.

Without checking, I am almost 100% sure that a group of men decided that pain bonds the Mom, pain medication is unnecessary, and having a nurse to clean and cook instead of them is a good idea. This whole thing reeks of testosterone.

I've had one "natural" birth - the others were blessed with epidurals. The natural was my 9 pounder - ouch - what bonding??? I was exhausted and in a daze for days.

L.

OK, yes, the 'pain as bonding' argument is grotesque; but I have to say everything else the Dutch are doing is right on target. And, contrary to the fears and suspicions of some of the other posters, I can reassure you that women are not risking their lives by choosing unmedicated at-home births: births with skilled attendants, who screened them beforehand for complications, and emergency obstetric care only a short ride away - this is Denmark we are talking about people, not the isolated jungle villages of some developing country! (Believe me, I am a midwife who spent many years in the villages of developing countries - I know firsthand about death in labor and I would never be advocating something I didn't know was clinically sound and safe).

Furthermore, I found Cassie's arguments about money being the bottom line to be fascinatingly misguided. While yes, having a baby at home is quite a bit cheaper than having a baby in the hospital, big insurance companies (such as those that have a stranglehold on our government and our healthcare) make a lot more money by promoting medicalized birth - which they can then charge a lot more for!! C-Sections are huge money-makers for doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies! That is why we send women to the hospital to have babies. That is why most OB residents have never even seen a non-medicalized birth. And that is why we have such  a culture of fear around what is a completely natural and normal bodily process.

I think the point is that the Dutch have a different cultural perspective on birth. Why is that wrong? I'd be interested in knowing how their outcomes compare to US outcomes.

Why is it that whenever someone posts something about natural birth or medicated birth people immediately divide into camps and insult the other?

Infant mortality rate is actually higher in the US than in The Netherlands (The Dutch live in The Netherlands, the Danish in Denmark, also see www.cnn.com/.../index.html).

The midwives are very skilled, and when complications arise, an ambulance is called. Furthermore, you are not allowed to have a homebirth by law if you live further than x minutes away from the hospital. The time it takes to get to the hospital is often about as long as it takes for a doctor to get paged and to get everyone ready for emergency surgery.  

Personally, I would love it if my insurance would pay for a nurse at home for a week instead of an expensive hospital birth.  I have had three 100% natural births and I would feel comfortable delivering at home or a birth center if that were an option.  I hate hospitals with their nurses coming in at 6am to draw your blood.  It is the absolute worst place to recover from having a baby.

Just read on one of the forums for moms I belong to that a member attended a homebirth resulting in a stillborn, full term baby.  The mom wanted to "experience a natural birth".  I guess she did.  Back before medical help all women had them at home and a lot of them and their babies died.  Had this child been born at a hospital he would be alive today.  I think what pisses me off about this is the feelings of the mother far outweighed the safety of the child.  She has ruined her entire life and taken his because she wanted an experience that has been sold to us by men as natural.

In response to a 'group of men' deciding that pain medication is unnecessary: If testosterone *is* involved, then it's only in giving us the impression that women cannot bring a child into this world without the supervision of an almighty doctor.

I know of a woman who delivered a stillborn, full term baby in a hospital with all the technology modern medicine has to offer. These things are more complicated that hospital vs. home birth.

I know of a woman who delivered a stillborn, full term baby in a hospital with all the technology modern medicine has to offer. These things are more complicated that hospital vs. home birth.

Just like pain relief should be available to women if they want it, so should completely natural, intervention-free births. So many times, women will want a natural birth and despite there not be an emergency or issues, they will end up with interventions.  This is not OK.  That is why some women opt for homebirths (and while things can go wrong at home, things go wrong at the hospital too.  remember, these women are usually low-risk and are cery well cared for during their pregnancies... it's not like they're unprepared.  and OBs and hospitals don't guarantee a healthy baby).

Also, I think that a positive end result should be the goal for both baby and mother. In my own experience, I was told not to worry because at least my baby was OK.  But I wasn't.  I felt wronged. Inferring that only a seemingly healthy baby matters totally undermines the connection women feel to the birth process.  It tells us that all of the emotions we have and have had during our pregnancy are null and void.  And yes, emergencies do happen, but in most cases, we are undereducated in the birth process and get screwed because we didn't know any better.  Then instead of being told to consider our feelings and ask questions (which we should have done before, but "everybody trusts their doctors, they know best (gag)"), we are told to ignore them.  How does that create a healthy mother and a healthy family?