This Comic is directly related to the Musing: Anti-Homebirth Press Release and Response! and

If you’d like to leave a comment, please scroll down to the next available non-comic blog entry, you know, a word-y one (For a myriad of reasons I turn off the comments on the comics themselves)…and comment away, I love to hear from you!!!!

Order this Cartoon as a 8.5 x 11 print on glossy photo paper and signed for only $10!

First,I love this article (thanks Jennifer! and I hope you’re enjoying Asheville!We miss you!) I especially like how the celebrity mamas seem to think that the MORE midwives the better. Isn’t that funny?

Celebrity home births

As homebirths become more popular, more and more celebrity mums are opting to have their babies at home. Interestingly enough, all the Kings and Queens of England were born at home, including the current Queen. In fact Princess Diana was the first member of the Royal family to have her babies in hospital.

Celebrity midwife April says, “Celebrity or no, every woman deserves the right to privacy, if she wishes, regarding her choices. Homebirthing will always continue on and in my opinion it is the famous who yearn to have what we the homebirthing tribes have; the simple, strong, without-fanfare birth that champions our beliefs best.” So which other celebrities are birthing at home and, more importantly, what have they got to say about the experience?

Party-loving Charlotte Church gave birth to a baby girl at home in her beloved Wales. The 21-year-old singer bought a birthing pool for the delivery which was attended by two midwives.She and boyfriend Gavin Henson, wept tears of joy at the arrival, according to reports.Read our news report on Charlotte’s birth.

Big Brother’s ‘Big Mutha’, Davina McMcall is a huge advocate of home births and she must know what she’s talking about, having given birth to all three children at home. Of her first child’s birth, Holly, Davina said “It was the best experience of my life - well apart from making her!”

Pamela Anderson had both her babies at home, with two midwives and her then husband Tommy Lee present. Other actresses who birthed at home include Lisa Bonet, best known for her role as Denise Huxtable on The Cosby Show, Meryl Streep, and Demi Moore who had all three of her children at home.

John Travolta’s wife, Kelly Preston, also had a homebirth with their daughter Ella and spoke of her experience as a Scientologist and the practice of labouring in silence. She said a silent birth was “just a peaceful, beautiful entry into this earth,” although she remembers at one point during her 13 hour labour shouting out, “Throw me in the car! I want an epidural!”

British actress Jemma Redgrave gave birth to 9lb 4oz Alfie at home after a six-hour labour with no pain relief and no postnatal complications. Her midwives were from the Birth Centre and after the birth she said, “The NHS is superb, but the staff can seem insensitive because they never see the same patient twice. I’ve always felt it was important to have some sort of relationship with the midwife. On the day I gave birth to my first child someone I didn’t know delivered me. The Birth Centre experience was totally different from the NHS. I felt like I was surrounded by friends.”

Supermodel Stella Tennant also gave birth at home with midwives from the Birth Centre. She says, “I am not afraid of hospital but I felt that if there were no complications with my pregnancy I would prefer to give birth in the familiar surroundings of my flat. I wanted to take as much responsibility as possible for the birth of my child.”

Singer Nellie Furtado is a self-confessed ‘hippie mum’ and proudly talks of the birth of her daughter Nevus, declaring, “I had a homebirth with midwives.” And mum Cindy Crawford had all three of her children at home with her husband Rande Gerber and three midwives on hand. She said, “I didn’t tell anyone last time because a lot of people are against home birth and tell you horror stories. Even my husband said at first, ‘Why are we doing this?’ But she says that her experience was ‘absolutely surreal,’ even though her son Presley was born after a gruelling 17 hour labour.

“I’m a big advocate of home births if the pregnancy’s been healthy,” she says. “We also didn’t let anyone come around for the first three days. We really kept that time for ourselves to get over everything.” Actress Lucy Lawless, best known as the leather-clad Xena, warrior princess, also gave birth at home with her husband, Xena producer Rob Tapert, and a midwife by her side. She described her home water birth as totally natural saying, “‘Nothing was more natural than having him in water. “The water temperature in the birthing pool is similar to a mother’s body temperature. The baby is essentially floating in water for nine months so it’s a smoother transition when they are born.” And Ricki Lake, who gave birth to son Owen at home in a bathtub said, “Having a child turns your world upside down. My goals in life have changed drastically since the second he landed on this planet.” The talk show host was so impressed by her home birth that she became an advocate for women wanting to deliver their babies at home. She trained as a doula and has since helped deliver several babies for pregnant women wanting to have a natural home birth.

and here’s the documentary link The Business of Being Born it’s coming out on Netflix in a week or so, rent it and invite over all of your friends!

Speaking of Documentaries what happened to this one? Born in the USA did anyone see it?

And of course here’s the Anti-Homebirth Statement by the UCOG Read it and Weep (thanks Erin N!)

and just when you’re ready to give up hope, here’s a THINGS TO DO list compiled by Susan Hodges (thanks Eva A.!)

Following up on the ACOG anti-home birth press release (see Grassroots message 801012 or read the release at: http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications/press_releases/nr02-06-08-2.cfm), here are some thoughts, resources and facts that may be useful if you have an opportunity to respond to press coverage in your local paper, or respond on-line to news coverage or blogs.

Consider using any press coverage of ACOG’s press release as an opportunity to put out accurate and positive facts about home birth and direct entry midwives and the Certified Professional Midwife credential, and minimize references to ACOG. That way instead of adding to the attention and authority of ACOG, you make the most of the opportunity to have people remember home birth and midwives with positive information. One trick is to make sure that you avoid mentioning “ACOG” last. And rather than trying to address all of the issues in one letter or blog, pick the one or two that you think are most important, or that you feel most confident about.

Feel free us use as resources the following (and you can send either or both of the press releases directly to your local newspaper if you think that would be useful):
· ICAN’s press release http://www.ican-online.org/advocacy/ican-responds
· The Big Push for Midwives press release http://www.thebigpushformidwives.org/pdf-bin/news.020708.pdf
· Childbirth Connection’s thoughtful and thorough analysis and critique of ACOG’s home birth policy statement (the basis for the latest ACOG press release) http://www.childbirthconnection.org/article.asp?ck=10465

You can find some tips on writing letters to the editor (print news) at http://cfmidwifery.org/Resources/Item.aspx?ID=2

Here are some facts you can use, in no particular order (and I’m sure you will think of more!):

· Twenty-four states license direct entry midwives, several for more than twenty years. Twenty-two use or recognize the Certified Professional Midwife (CPM) credential administered by the North American Registry of Midwives (www.narm.org) as the basis for licensing, and two states have voluntary licensing. In all these years, no state has repealed their midwifery law for any reason. Furthermore, in 9 states licensed midwives receive Medicaid reimbursement for their services. These records demonstrate that CPMs do not pose any threat to the health and safety of pregnant women and newborns.

· An economic analysis of the cost benefits of a licensed midwife program (Washington State) indicate that the cost savings to the health care system (public and private) is estimated to be ten times the cost of the program, even with this licensing program being the most expensive in the country. (Midwifery Licensure and Discipline Program in Washington State: Economic Costs and Benefits, (A report to the Washington Department of Health), Health Management Associates, October, 2007)

· Contrary to ACOG’s uninformed assertion, many rigorous scientific studies, published in leading medical journals, have found that for a healthy woman having a normal pregnancy, a planned, midwife-attended home birth is as safe as a hospital birth and with far lower rates of medical interventions. The most recent is also the largest study, based on prospective reporting for all the births attended by Certified Professional Midwives in 2000, published in 2005 in the British Medical Journal . (“Outcomes of planned home births with certified professional midwives: large prospective study in North America.” Kenneth C Johnson, senior epidemiologist, Betty-Anne Daviss, project manager. BMJ 2005;330:1416 (18 June). Published online at http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/330/7505/1416?ehom ) Also see CfM’s summary fact sheet at: http://www.cfmidwifery.org/pdf/CPM2000.pdf .

· About 99% of births in the US take place in hospitals. If standard obstetric practice is so good, why does the US rank so abysmally when it comes to maternal mortality and neonatal mortality?

· The Complete Mothers’ Index 2007 shows that mothers in the US have a higher lifetime risk of maternal mortality than the mothers in 27 other developed countries http://www.savethechildren.org/campaigns/state-of-the-worlds-mothers-report/2007/mothers-index.html
· The World Health Report (from the World Health Organization) indicates that the neonatal death rate (death in the first 28 days of life) is greater in the United States than in 35 other countries, http://www.who.int/whr/2005/annexes-en.pdf

· ACOG claims that “complications can arise with little or no warning even among women with low-risk pregnancies”. However, complications seen in low-risk women laboring in hospitals are often related to the many routine practices and interventions that disturb the birth process and cause or lead to complications and more interventions. In fact, most of these practices were adopted without being studied for safety, and many are still routine even after being studied and found to be either worthless or harmful or both. (Enkin et al. A Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth www.childbirthconnection.org ) Midwives attending home births avoid unnecessary interventions and the use of drugs, allowing normal birth to proceed. They are trained and experienced in noticing any signs of problems and taking appropriate action, including transfer to medical care in a hospital when necessary, which is rarely. (see the BMJ article cited above)

· The press release states “ACOG acknowledges a woman’s right to make informed decisions regarding her delivery…” but goes on to say that ACOG does not support any of the alternatives to a doctor-controlled birth in hospital or birth center, or anyone who provide or supports home birth. So how is ACOG supporting informed decisions?

· ACOG claims that an “emerging contributor” to the rise in cesarean section rates is “maternal choice.” However, there is no evidence for this claim. In fact, recent surveys of mothers found that less than 0.08% of pregnant women request a C-section. Applying these numbers to a recent figure for annual births, a scant 2,600 out of 4.1 million pregnant women actually requested a C-section. (Declercq ER, Sakala C, Corry MP, Applebaum S. Listening to Mothers II: Report of the Second National U.S. Survey of Women’s Childbearing Experiences. New York: Childbirth Connection, October 2006.) Clearly, this number is so small it could not possibly explain the doubling of cesarean section rates in the last decade. Furthermore, when he was President of ACOG, Benjamin Harer publicly promoted maternal choice cesarean sections on popular TV news and talk shows, for reasons for which there was not evidence. (for example: Benjamin Harer on Good Morning America, 2000. http://www.sciencebasedbirth.com/temporary02/CEO%20synop%20politics_of_cesarean_2004.htm ) Having actively worked to create a market for cesarean sections for no medical reason, based on lies and misinformation, ACOG is now blaming women for the increased cesarean rate??

· When attending births outside the hospital, both Certified Nurse Midwives and Certified Professional Midwives referred fewer than 5% of mothers for cesarean sections, while obstetricians were performing cesarean sections on nearly 20% of low risk mothers in hospitals. (see CfM fact sheet with references at: http://www.cfmidwifery.org/pdf/cesarean2x.pdf)

· Some women are going to choose to deliver their baby at home, for a variety of very legitimate religious, social, health or economic reasons. These women deserve to have the best care available the care of a well-trained midwife with experience in out-of-hospital settings.

· While ACOG states that childbirth is a normal physiologic process, today’s obstetrical profession performs cesarean sections for nearly one third of births, induces labor in nearly half of births, and administers drugs of one kind or another to more than two thirds drugs that pass through the placenta and harm the baby. In fact, almost the only women who give birth with no interventions are those who give birth at home. (Listening to Mothers: Report of the First National U.S. Survey of Women’s Childbearing Experiences. New York: Maternity Center Association, October 2002.)

· Apparently obstetricians are not trained to support normal birth, but oppose the very health care providers who are: midwives who are trained and experienced in attending births outside the hospital. The Certified Professional Midwife credential is the only maternity care credential that requires experience in out-of-hospital settings.

There are many more comics coming!
Love,
Heather

This Comic is directly related to the Musing: Parenting Culture Studies, huh? and
This Comic is directly related to the Musing: Marginal Scientists Manipulate Science! and
This Comic is directly related to the Comic: Marginal Scientists!

If you’d like to leave a comment, please scroll down to the next available non-comic blog entry, you know, a word-y one (For a myriad of reasons I turn off the comments on the comics themselves)…and comment away, I love to hear from you!!!!

Order this Cartoon as a 8.5 x 11 print on glossy photo paper and signed for only $10!

This Comic is directly related to the Musing: Parenting Culture Studies, huh? and
This Comic is directly related to the Musing: Marginal Scientists Manipulate Science! and
This Comic is directly related to the Comic: Scientists Manipulate!

If you’d like to leave a comment, please scroll down to the next available non-comic blog entry, you know, a word-y one (For a myriad of reasons I turn off the comments on the comics themselves)…and comment away, I love to hear from you!!!!

Order this Cartoon as a 8.5 x 11 print on glossy photo paper and signed for only $10!

So, I had this idea in mind to replace all the words with other words, to get kind of mad-libby with these ’so-called’ papers and studies that sneeringly discuss breastfeeding (and what the heck, ANY of our mother issues, right?) And as I was mulling it, working it out in my head, Mark Morford wrote this excellent piece on Scientific Studies:
Study says many studies suck
Research shows we are far too drunk on stupid studies that tell us what research shows
Here’s a quote:

Look, I know. Studies rule. Studies are our cultural cocaine. We cannot get enough. I cite them all the time myself in this very column. Many studies are incredibly helpful and informative, and without the trillions of formal scientific studies we’ve enjoyed to date we would know precious little about everything from medicine to human behavior to how many orgasms a woman can have in a day (unlimited!) to the average number of erections a healthy male gets in his sleep (5.3!) and the exact number of times George W. Bush and his scabrous lizards lied to the nation so as to lead us into a disgusting and horrid war (935!) and, well, a million other Very Important Things.

And speaking of, here is a lovely, important, enlightening study that I would like to tell you about (thanks Jeanne!) I have a copy but I’m forbidden to share it…but here’s a bit: ‘As good as chocolate’ and ‘better than ice cream’: How toddler, and older, breastfeeders experience breastfeeding by Karleen D. Gribble

This study revealed that breastfeeding can be a time of intimacy between mother and child, with the child connecting with his/her mother by stroking her or talking with her during breastfeeds. Breastfeeding was also shown to be something that was integrated into daily life as children continued to play, watch television or read a book while breastfeeding. While the intimacy associated with breastfeeding often leads to it being described as a special time between mother and child (Dignam, 1995), it is evident that breastfeeding can also be very ordinary and not separated from other aspects of life. Further research to elucidate what activities mothers might be involved in while breastfeeding may provide a greater understanding of how mothers incorporate breastfeeding into their lives. The responses that children gave to questions about why they breastfed and what they feel like when they breastfeed validated maternal perceptions about why children breastfeed. Children said that they really liked breastfeeding, that it had a calming and relaxing impact on them and that when they breastfeed they feel close to their mother. Children also explicitly stated that they breastfed because they like the milk but their enjoyment of breastmilk can also be deduced from their descriptions of the taste of breastmilk. Many children compared breastmilk to a type of milk such as cows’ milk, rice milk, a flavoured milk or just plain milk and given that breastmilk is indeed a type of milk this is not unexpected. Many children also stated that breastmilk tasted like something sweet, for example, like a type of fruit, chocolate, sugar, cordial, jam, lollies or ice cream. They also compared the taste of breastmilk to a sweet food using phrases such as ‘better than ice cream’ or ‘as good as chocolate’ or indeed simply describing the milk as ‘sweet’. Again, this is not unexpected since breastmilk contains a relatively high concentration of the sugar, lactose (Emmett & Rogers, 1997). Some children compared the taste of breastmilk to foods that do not immediately appear to resemble characteristics of breastmilk such as cheese, peanut butter or ‘McDonalds’. However, a large proportion of the children described breastmilk as being yummy or nice or said that they like or love the taste and this may be the thread that combines all of the descriptions the children used. It appears that children like the taste of breastmilk and when asked to describe its flavour they compare it to a food they consider delicious. It is also worth noting that children’s descriptions of breastmilk can provide diagnostic information as the children of two mothers who had recently had mastitis described the milk as sometimes tasting ‘salty’ or ‘yucky’. Mastitis changes the flavour of milk by increasing the salt concentration and mothers sometimes report breast refusal as the first symptom of developing the condition. Mothers’ recall of conversations they had had with their children about breastfeeding provided insight into how children view breasts and breastfeeding. It appears that many of these long-termbreastfeeders saw the world through a lens where breastfeeding is normal and expected and where breasts are for breastfeeding. This view of breastfeeding may have arisen from children’s experience of breastfeeding themselves or from regularly seeing others breastfeed. This is in contrast to the view predominant in many developed countries where breasts are considered a sex organ (Dettwyler, 1995a; Stearns, 1999). The sexualisation of breasts has resulted in many, including children, believing that breastfeeding is an activity to be performed only in private (Russell, Richards, Jones, & Hoddinott, 2004; Stearns, 1999). The resultant stigma associated with breastfeeding in public remains a significant barrier to women successfully breastfeeding (Hannan et al., 2005; Li et al., 2004). It is likely that the breastfeeders in this study will assimilate the dominant culture’s sexualisation of breasts as they grow but perhaps they will also retain an acceptance of the nurturing role of breasts and carry this into adulthood and parenting….

Conclusions Despite the WHO/UNICEF breastfeeding duration recommendations, in developed countries, very few children are breastfed beyond infancy. The social pressure to wean early is an important factor preventing a greater incidence of long-term breastfeeding. Part of the pressure to wean stems from the common belief that breastfeeding is something that mothers somehow impose on their children. This study shows that, to the contrary, long-term breastfeeders actively seek breastfeeding from their mothers because they find it pleasurable and helpful in dealing with stress. An understanding of breastfeeding as experienced by children may aid in removal of the stigma associated with breastfeeding beyond infancy. Learning about breastfeeding via observation, discussion and role-play is common amongst long-term breastfeeders and further research is needed to elucidate the significance that this might have in the ability of girls to breastfeed their children when they themselves become mothers.

But of course, we (the enlightened mamas on this blog ;o) already know all of that didn’t we? This is the rare study, one with a hypothesis that maybe just maybe, the bonds between mother and child should be respected and nurtured and then seeks information to support that hypothesis.

Unfortunately the large proportion of studies right now- millions and billions of them- are hell–bent on showing that perhaps CIO is just fine (if the study is heavily manipulated), perchance formula is almost as good (ignore the warning labels, please!), maybe full-term breastfeeders are loony. These studies seem almost (dare I say?) worded to let the mainstream culture (and the super-independent lifestyle) off the hook. They’re piling on, trying to drown out the simple lifestyle choice of family, and things that you just KNOW to be true.

so I agree with Mark Morford:

This, then, is the danger: Despite the frequent inanity, despite the insulting silliness of much of the information, we’ve been led to believe that it is only through a relentless obsession with tiny, data-driven studies that we can obtain real knowledge, real understanding of what we’re about and how we should eat, sleep, screw, breathe.

As such, we risk perhaps the most vital and precious aspect of human understanding, our innate sense that everything is far, far more complicated and messy and juicy and fluidly interconnected, far more non-dissectible than we like to imagine, and in fact trying to dismember human experience into its drab components merely destroys the holistic integrity of the whole damnable circus.

Look at it this way: It’s a bit like touching your lover softly, carefully on the lips. It’s either a dry, mappable array of specific nerve endings and chemicals and saliva glands and swarms of bacteria and random synapses screaming their desperate need to procreate, or it’s, well, pure goddamn poetry. Study says: Your choice.

Yep, your choice.

Love,
Heather

(sleep deprived, I HOPE this made sense ;o) but man, that was a FUN birthday party!

The Musing is related to this Comic: Marginal Scientists!
and this Comic: scientists manipulate!
and this Musing: Parenting Culture Studies, huh?