Recently, NC CPM Emily "Amy" Medwin was arrested for practicing medicine without a license. This is NOT her first run in with NC authorities. NC Friends of Midwives are rallying behind this midwife in droves. According to them, she is a wonderful midwife.
In the state of NC, it is illegal to practice midwifery unless you are a Certified Nurse Midwife or a CNM. The state of North Carolina is NOT limiting your choices. They are giving you safe options. CPM's have a perinatal mortality rate that is 3X higher than in the hospital. I will go so far as to say that CPM's are a threat to public safety, NOT an asset. When a product causes a few deaths, recalls are performed and products are taken off of shelves. So, why are non-CNM's still practicing??
Having shared my story, many people have said that they cannot believe my midwife is still practicing. Faith Beltz, who caused the death of Aquila, is still practicing. A North Carolina mother lost her baby due to Amy Medwin amnd another has a baby clinging to life. Why don't these friend of midwife organizations stand up and say "We want mothers and babies safe"? If you are supporting a midwife that has caused an infant loss, you are showing people that the health of women and their babies is unimportant, the importance lies in just having midwives. Incompetence should be discouraged. What if it is your baby next?? Don't think it can't happen to you, because it can. Not a single homebirth mother is invincible. This midwife you support could end up being the very person who destroys your world by taking your child's life. Why can't homebirth supporters tell incompetent midwives that they will not support them??
I know people are clamoring about choice. One incompetent midwife does not take away your choice. If anything, you have been given safER choices. If homebirth means more to you than your child's life, hey, find another subpar CPM- they're all over the place. If you want SAFE choices, go to a DR or a CNM. I have to say, CNM's do have better rates than even doctors. However, I think it also shows that CNM's do take on only real low risk mothers. If CPM's were so educated and knew all about "normal birth", their numbers would reflect those of CNM's. CPM numbers don't even reflect those of DR's! Forget choice. Let's think about SAFETY! There is nothing stopping CPM's from becoming CNM's. Oh wait, they don't want to go to school, don't want to learn about the entire body, don't want to spend the money, AND women don't find educated care providers desirable!
Would you support a person performing back alley abortions?? They know all about the reproductive system and how abortions are performed. You might lose a few mothers. Interestingly enough, childbirth is riskier than abortion!
Showing posts with label infant mortality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label infant mortality. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Incompetence in Midwifery
Recently, NC CPM Emily "Amy" Medwin was arrested for practicing medicine without a license. This is NOT her first run in with NC authorities. NC Friends of Midwives are rallying behind this midwife in droves. According to them, she is a wonderful midwife.
In the state of NC, it is illegal to practice midwifery unless you are a Certified Nurse Midwife or a CNM. The state of North Carolina is NOT limiting your choices. They are giving you safe options. CPM's have a perinatal mortality rate that is 3X higher than in the hospital. I will go so far as to say that CPM's are a threat to public safety, NOT an asset. When a product causes a few deaths, recalls are performed and products are taken off of shelves. So, why are non-CNM's still practicing??
Having shared my story, many people have said that they cannot believe my midwife is still practicing. Faith Beltz, who caused the death of Aquila, is still practicing. A North Carolina mother lost her baby due to Amy Medwin amnd another has a baby clinging to life. Why don't these friend of midwife organizations stand up and say "We want mothers and babies safe"? If you are supporting a midwife that has caused an infant loss, you are showing people that the health of women and their babies is unimportant, the importance lies in just having midwives. Incompetence should be discouraged. What if it is your baby next?? Don't think it can't happen to you, because it can. Not a single homebirth mother is invincible. This midwife you support could end up being the very person who destroys your world by taking your child's life. Why can't homebirth supporters tell incompetent midwives that they will not support them??
I know people are clamoring about choice. One incompetent midwife does not take away your choice. If anything, you have been given safER choices. If homebirth means more to you than your child's life, hey, find another subpar CPM- they're all over the place. If you want SAFE choices, go to a DR or a CNM. I have to say, CNM's do have better rates than even doctors. However, I think it also shows that CNM's do take on only real low risk mothers. If CPM's were so educated and knew all about "normal birth", their numbers would reflect those of CNM's. CPM numbers don't even reflect those of DR's! Forget choice. Let's think about SAFETY! There is nothing stopping CPM's from becoming CNM's. Oh wait, they don't want to go to school, don't want to learn about the entire body, don't want to spend the money, AND women don't find educated care providers desirable!
Would you support a person performing back alley abortions?? They know all about the reproductive system and how abortions are performed. You might lose a few mothers. Interestingly enough, childbirth is riskier than abortion!
In the state of NC, it is illegal to practice midwifery unless you are a Certified Nurse Midwife or a CNM. The state of North Carolina is NOT limiting your choices. They are giving you safe options. CPM's have a perinatal mortality rate that is 3X higher than in the hospital. I will go so far as to say that CPM's are a threat to public safety, NOT an asset. When a product causes a few deaths, recalls are performed and products are taken off of shelves. So, why are non-CNM's still practicing??
Having shared my story, many people have said that they cannot believe my midwife is still practicing. Faith Beltz, who caused the death of Aquila, is still practicing. A North Carolina mother lost her baby due to Amy Medwin amnd another has a baby clinging to life. Why don't these friend of midwife organizations stand up and say "We want mothers and babies safe"? If you are supporting a midwife that has caused an infant loss, you are showing people that the health of women and their babies is unimportant, the importance lies in just having midwives. Incompetence should be discouraged. What if it is your baby next?? Don't think it can't happen to you, because it can. Not a single homebirth mother is invincible. This midwife you support could end up being the very person who destroys your world by taking your child's life. Why can't homebirth supporters tell incompetent midwives that they will not support them??
I know people are clamoring about choice. One incompetent midwife does not take away your choice. If anything, you have been given safER choices. If homebirth means more to you than your child's life, hey, find another subpar CPM- they're all over the place. If you want SAFE choices, go to a DR or a CNM. I have to say, CNM's do have better rates than even doctors. However, I think it also shows that CNM's do take on only real low risk mothers. If CPM's were so educated and knew all about "normal birth", their numbers would reflect those of CNM's. CPM numbers don't even reflect those of DR's! Forget choice. Let's think about SAFETY! There is nothing stopping CPM's from becoming CNM's. Oh wait, they don't want to go to school, don't want to learn about the entire body, don't want to spend the money, AND women don't find educated care providers desirable!
Would you support a person performing back alley abortions?? They know all about the reproductive system and how abortions are performed. You might lose a few mothers. Interestingly enough, childbirth is riskier than abortion!
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
So outraged over maternal mortality
Recently, Ina May Gaskin has reported that maternal mortality is on the rise. The supposed rate is 14.5 out of 100,000. Now, according to the CDC's stats from 2003, the rate is 12.3 out of 100,000. Let's break this down to the 1,000 mark. That would equal .145. NCB advocates are angry about a rate of .145? Then, they are blaming modern obstetrics and "unhealthy women".
The out of hospital death rate is 7.84 (out of 1,000). The amount of babies dying outside of the hospital is 54 times higher than the amount of maternal deaths.
So, based on the numbers, where should the outrage lie? Why are NCB advocates making a huge fuss about a rate of .145? We know that pregnancy carries risks and can cause maternal health problems. We also know that people do have more health related issues these days. Luckily modern medicine can help a majority of people suffering from health related issues both in and out of pregnancy. Look at modern day numbers compared to those of days gone by when it was commonplace for a mother to die. Imagine all of these pregnancy induced issues that are now manageable. 100 years ago, the maternal mortality rates were 15.4 out of 100,000. I do admit that for having so much technology, the improvement is not incredibly high, at least not as high as I would imagine!
However, looking at infant mortality rates, we know that in 1911, the infant mortality rate was 135 out of 1,000. So, out of 100,000 births 13,500 babies died. In 2005, the perinatal/neonatal death rates were 5.79. If we look at this out of 100,000 births, that would be 579 babies. So, only 4.3% of babies now die compared to the good ole days. If you look at out of hospital rates, 5.8% of babies now die compared to 100 years ago.
Which numbers should we be outraged over again?? Perhaps it is time for Ina May to care about the babies dying in the name of homebirth!
The out of hospital death rate is 7.84 (out of 1,000). The amount of babies dying outside of the hospital is 54 times higher than the amount of maternal deaths.
So, based on the numbers, where should the outrage lie? Why are NCB advocates making a huge fuss about a rate of .145? We know that pregnancy carries risks and can cause maternal health problems. We also know that people do have more health related issues these days. Luckily modern medicine can help a majority of people suffering from health related issues both in and out of pregnancy. Look at modern day numbers compared to those of days gone by when it was commonplace for a mother to die. Imagine all of these pregnancy induced issues that are now manageable. 100 years ago, the maternal mortality rates were 15.4 out of 100,000. I do admit that for having so much technology, the improvement is not incredibly high, at least not as high as I would imagine!
However, looking at infant mortality rates, we know that in 1911, the infant mortality rate was 135 out of 1,000. So, out of 100,000 births 13,500 babies died. In 2005, the perinatal/neonatal death rates were 5.79. If we look at this out of 100,000 births, that would be 579 babies. So, only 4.3% of babies now die compared to the good ole days. If you look at out of hospital rates, 5.8% of babies now die compared to 100 years ago.
Which numbers should we be outraged over again?? Perhaps it is time for Ina May to care about the babies dying in the name of homebirth!
So outraged over maternal mortality
Recently, Ina May Gaskin has reported that maternal mortality is on the rise. The supposed rate is 14.5 out of 100,000. Now, according to the CDC's stats from 2003, the rate is 12.3 out of 100,000. Let's break this down to the 1,000 mark. That would equal .145. NCB advocates are angry about a rate of .145? Then, they are blaming modern obstetrics and "unhealthy women".
The out of hospital death rate is 7.84 (out of 1,000). The amount of babies dying outside of the hospital is 54 times higher than the amount of maternal deaths.
So, based on the numbers, where should the outrage lie? Why are NCB advocates making a huge fuss about a rate of .145? We know that pregnancy carries risks and can cause maternal health problems. We also know that people do have more health related issues these days. Luckily modern medicine can help a majority of people suffering from health related issues both in and out of pregnancy. Look at modern day numbers compared to those of days gone by when it was commonplace for a mother to die. Imagine all of these pregnancy induced issues that are now manageable. 100 years ago, the maternal mortality rates were 15.4 out of 100,000. I do admit that for having so much technology, the improvement is not incredibly high, at least not as high as I would imagine!
However, looking at infant mortality rates, we know that in 1911, the infant mortality rate was 135 out of 1,000. So, out of 100,000 births 13,500 babies died. In 2005, the perinatal/neonatal death rates were 5.79. If we look at this out of 100,000 births, that would be 579 babies. So, only 4.3% of babies now die compared to the good ole days. If you look at out of hospital rates, 5.8% of babies now die compared to 100 years ago.
Which numbers should we be outraged over again?? Perhaps it is time for Ina May to care about the babies dying in the name of homebirth!
The out of hospital death rate is 7.84 (out of 1,000). The amount of babies dying outside of the hospital is 54 times higher than the amount of maternal deaths.
So, based on the numbers, where should the outrage lie? Why are NCB advocates making a huge fuss about a rate of .145? We know that pregnancy carries risks and can cause maternal health problems. We also know that people do have more health related issues these days. Luckily modern medicine can help a majority of people suffering from health related issues both in and out of pregnancy. Look at modern day numbers compared to those of days gone by when it was commonplace for a mother to die. Imagine all of these pregnancy induced issues that are now manageable. 100 years ago, the maternal mortality rates were 15.4 out of 100,000. I do admit that for having so much technology, the improvement is not incredibly high, at least not as high as I would imagine!
However, looking at infant mortality rates, we know that in 1911, the infant mortality rate was 135 out of 1,000. So, out of 100,000 births 13,500 babies died. In 2005, the perinatal/neonatal death rates were 5.79. If we look at this out of 100,000 births, that would be 579 babies. So, only 4.3% of babies now die compared to the good ole days. If you look at out of hospital rates, 5.8% of babies now die compared to 100 years ago.
Which numbers should we be outraged over again?? Perhaps it is time for Ina May to care about the babies dying in the name of homebirth!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Popular Posts
-
On June 4th 2008 I began laboring. I had already been having contractions for 6 days! Two weeks prior I had begun losing my plug, my body wa...
-
Since Mary passed, I have gotten into scrapbooking, both digital and traditional. When you go tryng to fnd stuff, it's very hard! So, I ...
