Midwives vs. Doctors in US Maternal Mortality Crisis
Friday 09 July 2010
by: Hannah Rubenstein | Inter Press Service | Report
New York - "I was baking a cake when my contractions were two minutes apart," Kristine says, her voice warm with memory, "not in a hospital, holding onto a bedside somewhere screaming."
She speaks of her experience tenderly. "I felt like giving birth was in my hands, having it at home," she says, "not on a doctor's schedule, in somebody else's hands. By the time my daughter was born, I felt like my midwife was a part of my family."
Kristine is one of more than 300,000 women in the United States who choose to give birth with the help of a midwife each year, and one of approximately 40,000 women who give birth at home. Both of her daughters, now aged 22 months and 11 weeks, were attended at birth by a midwife in Kristine's home. If she has another child, Kristine says, she will plan a home birth with a midwife.
The practice of midwifery in the United States is not a new phenomenon - the first midwifery school, the Frontier Graduate School of Midwifery, opened its doors in 1939 - but has been gaining popularity in the past three decades. Midwife-assisted births now account for approximately eight percent of all births in the United States.
Because midwifery as a profession is subject to individual state regulations and licensing, a wide spectrum of midwife qualifications exist, from Certified Nurse Midwives (CNMs), who most often hold bachelor's degrees and work in hospital settings, to Direct-Entry Midwives (DEMs), who train through apprenticeship and work in individual homes.
What all types of midwives have in common is a shared philosophy about birth experience.
Carolyn Keefe, a board member and consumer advocate for the organisation Citizens for Midwifery, explained to IPS that what underpins the profession of midwifery is a doctrine called the Midwives Model of Care, which is "a traditional approach that starts with individualised care and looks at the specific mother and her baby, her pregnancy, and her family - not as another cog in the wheel - and makes assessments based on what the mother needs."
The Midwives Model of Care is based on four practices: monitoring the physical, psychological, and social wellbeing of the mother throughout the childbearing cycle; providing the mother with individualised education, counselling, and prenatal care, continuous hands-on assistance during labour and delivery, and postpartum support; minimising technological interventions; and identifying and referring women who require obstetrical attention to the hospital.
In the United States, where adherence to traditional Western medicine is the norm, midwifery's emphasis on minimising technological intervention in the birth process has been viewed with scepticism and, in some cases, anger. Midwife- assisted home births in particular, where medical intervention is not an option, have sparked criticism from the medical community.
In 2008, the American Medical Association (AMA) passed a resolution stating that "the safest setting for labour, delivery and the immediate post-partum period is in a hospital or a birthing centre within a hospital."
The same year, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) released a statement condemning the practice of home birth, asserting, "Childbirth decisions should not be dictated or influenced by what's fashionable, trendy, or the latest cause célèbre."
Proponents of midwifery have been vocal in response to these decrees. Élan McAllister, president of the New York-based organisation Choices in Childbirth, told IPS, "The ACOG and the AMA have no control over home birth and little control over midwives. They have a long history of holding the authority when it comes to maternity and health care respectively and are not interested in giving away any of that power."
"The midwifery model, which views birth as normal rather than pathological, is such a departure from the more medical approach that it is difficult for them to view it as anything other than a challenge," she said.
Both doctors and midwives rely on raw data to bolster their arguments, but the significance of the numbers can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Both sides cite the appalling increase in maternal mortality rates in the U.S. as evidence to back up claims - in 2006, the last year for which data is available, the maternal mortality rate reached 13.3 deaths per 100,000 live births, double the 6.6 deaths per 100,000 live births in 1987.
In addition, one in three babies in the U.S. is now delivered via Caesarean section, a procedure that carries risks of complication.
In light of next week's World Population Day on Jul. 11, members of the international community have been focusing on issues such as maternal mortality rates.
An Amnesty International report entitled "Deadly Delivery: The Maternal Health Care Crisis in the USA" details a shocking statistic: In the U.S., women have a higher risk of dying of pregnancy-related complications than in 40 other countries, despite the fact that the U.S. spends more on health care than any other nation.
The medical community believes that hospital delivery will minimise such risks to the mother and baby; the midwife community stands in direct opposition to this claim.
One point that both sides can agree on is that a woman who chooses to deliver at home with the aid of a midwife must be a "low-risk" pregnancy, with no outstanding risk factors that could threaten the pregnancy, such as gestational diabetes or a history of gynecological problems. "High-risk" pregnancies need to be supervised in a hospital setting by a medical professional.
For women like Kristine, who had low-risk pregnancies, the idea of delivering a baby at home with the help of a midwife is not only preferable, but innate.
"I see a midwife as a woman who assists a mother in birthing," she says. "It's something she can do herself. The midwife is there if any problems should arise."
She pauses, adding, "Birth is a natural process. Since the beginning of man, women have given birth by themselves." She smiles. "That's what we do."
![]()
Visit IPS news for fresh perspectives on development and globalization.
All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.



Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
Yes. Women give birth by
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 12:43 — Anonymous (not verified)Yes. Women give birth by themselves. With huge mortality, which is why women used to die by the thousands during childbirth, along with their babies. What reversed that process? Modern Medicine. It is like saying 'fighting infections is what we do' and not taking antibiotics. Yes, our body can fight infections on its own, SOMETIMES. But to say that we can fight off Yellow Fever, or plague, or Smallpox without modern medicine is simply silly. It is great to have babies at home if it is safe. But figure out if it is safe, don't just say 'oh, it must be safe, because we have been doing it for thousands of years'.
Certified Nurse Midwives in
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 12:54 — BitchMidwife (not verified)Certified Nurse Midwives in the US have more than bachelor's degrees - they have master's degrees, usually in nursing. Legally and in terms of licensure for practice and prescribing, CNMs are lumped in with other advanced practice nurses - nurse practitioners, CRNAs, &c, and are regulated by state boards of nursing. In 2 states one does not have to have an RN license but can be a Certified Midwife (CM) but otherwise takes the same ACNM board exam. All CNMs/CMs must pass a Board Exam to be licensed. A couple of states have a state midwifery board, and midwives are regulated by other bodies, such as dept. of public health or medical board, in a couple other states. For more information on CNMs see the American College of Nurse Midwife website at www.acnm.org
The article raises some
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 13:14 — mainsail (not verified)The article raises some interesting points, but could have said more about the economics of reproduction. It is no accident that Caesarean births are so common--the fee for these is much higher than for a vaginal birth. Even more absurd is the fact that so many are done at the request of the mother, who wants to avoid the physical rigors of conventional birth.
It also needs to be mentioned that the back-to-Eden mother who wants the most "natural" birth possible, will the the first to call in the lawyers if anything goes wrong with their home birth.
The midwife philosophy is admirable--too bad some of it cannot rub off on some of the MDs.
My grandfather, Nicholson J.
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 15:59 — Anonymous (not verified)My grandfather, Nicholson J. Eastman, would be distressed at the attitude shown by ACOG. He was a president of ACOG from 1961 to 1962. As professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Johns Hopkins he was highly regarded and was intensely interested in maternal health worldwide. He was a huge advocate for midwifery, realizing that it was not possible to have doctors attend every birth. Times are different and the ACOG he knew may very well have turned into a a physician's lobbying group rather than one dedicated to the advancement of the science.
I had two boys out of
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 16:33 — JadeQueen (not verified)I had two boys out of hospital. I had read a book called Immaculate Deception, which scared the daylights out of me with hospital horror stories. I was near a hospital, but if we could do it at home, that is what I wanted. Hospitals now have anti-biotic-resistant germs and other challenges I did not want to deal with. In working around my home, I was likely resistant to most of its germs. That was over 30 years ago.
The medicalisation of
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 16:42 — wisedum (not verified)The medicalisation of childbirth, and just about whetever else can be medicalised, are simply a continuing part of a pattern of the removal of the power of individuals to take their own decisions about their health care.
Childbirth is a natural occurrence. Both of my children were born at home, after checking through conventional, non invasive means (ultrasound, etc) that the foetus was healthy, that the position of the baby was suitable, etc.
As a participant, along with the midwife, it was clear that the hospitalisation of mothers who are healthy, young, free of complications and who choose to have children at home, and have an option open should the need arise to go to a nursing home or hospital, is not a high risk activity.
The stance taken by both the ACOG and similar organisations around the world are simply a move to keep the business of childbirth wrapped up by telling scary stories to mothers to be about the dangers of childbirth. Sure things can go wrong but so too can they go wrong in hospital. Lets be real about things.
Home birth is less stressful for the mother, for the child and for the family. It keeps everyone together, the father gets involved from the get go and nurses and medical people do not come and tell you a whole bunch of rubbish that is not needed. Instead you find it out from people who know about babies by helping give birth to them - midwives, doulas, etc.
Doctors have their place but its about time they are torn down from the pedestal they presently occupy, especially in regard to childbirth procedure.
I couldn't have gone through
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 22:58 — Maggie (not verified)I couldn't have gone through this life as a woman without knowing what natural childbirth was. I'm stronger for it, and in awe of it, and my son is happy for it too - he wasn't spanked or exposed to harsh lighting and was able to find his own way to the nipple and begin nursing on his own. It's just the way it should be, and I'm sad that women and their husbands in the US are scared into hospitals - it shouldn't be. A good, modern documentary on the subject is by - of all figures - Riki Lake - "The business of being born". it's well worth the watch to discover the medical cycle that brings us to such a high c-section rate....
All three of my children
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 23:33 — mIKe (not verified)All three of my children were delivered by c-section; first was emergency, second was emergency in spite of a v-back practitioner's best efforts, so we scheduled the third and forewent any hassle. We're done, any more would kill my wife.
I have a little respect for the pains the medical establishment takes to ensure the health of both mother and child. Bacteria and infections are possible at home as well as in hospital, but if there's a problem at home you've lost the time it takes to get to a hospital. Even if a professional midwife were attending, that's time we couldn't have afforded. You pay your money, you take your chances.
The reason why maternal
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 23:37 — Lucy (not verified)The reason why maternal mortality rates have risen has to do with our health insurance debacle, and lack of access to health care, including prenatal health care. Not because there's a fashionable trend to have home births with mid-wives. I'll venture to guess that these women are generally health pregnancies, informed, and low, low risk for anything going wrong. In addition, to my recollection (since I gave birth to my son with a mid-wife - but in a hospital), mid-wives work under the supervision of a doctor. We have come forward in terms of the days when women died so easily in childbirth. Indeed, I myself had a birth whereupon, in another time and place, I well may have died, but for modern medicine. But in today's world, I think it's preposterous to connect American home births to the rise in maternal mortality. I'll also that I believe my mid-wife had a master's degree, and technically speaking, was better than many doctors. I avoided a ceasarean, among other things, which I think would have happened in my case, with a traditional doctor. And I do think the problems in our system have to do with lack of access to care, due to our health insurance system. Which is not being remedied by the reform bill. Remedy would mean opening up and expanded and improved Medicare for all women in the United States. So this is a distraction from the real issues.
If you don't have health
Sat, 07/10/2010 - 23:59 — Anonymous (not verified)If you don't have health insurance, and it *looks* like you're o.k., it can be less expensive to have a home birth. Also, some just don't see doctors and head to the emergency room when it's time. Or there could be home births that have little or nothing to do with the fashionable trends in more affluent and liberal communities, i.e. with more informal kinds of midwives. I think the article is missing some information.
The AMA has no right getting
Sun, 07/11/2010 - 00:15 — whaler (not verified)The AMA has no right getting their panties in a twist if people are seeking out unlicensed, informal midwives for home births. They know damn well what the problem is. Let them supporting an expanded and improved Medicare open to all women in the Untied States. Otherwise, consider themselves total hypocrites on this issue.
ok..... we'll ignore that
Sun, 07/11/2010 - 09:48 — nerdpocalypse (not verified)ok..... we'll ignore that the maternal rate of BEING MURDERED is 1.7 per hundred thousand (with 6.6 per 100k being total maternal mortality and I do not know if that includes murder or not).
Maternal mortality is, like most health outcomes, the result of multiple steps that are interdependently influenced by many factors.
Poverty, social isolation, and poor health literacy are the most relevant features underlying health problems leading to increased mortality.
http://www.nerdpocalypse.net/maternal%20mortality.html
(would it have HURT you to put in primary data, research, analysis ?!? sheesh)
Here's the reality: every
Sun, 07/11/2010 - 10:17 — Anonymous (not verified)Here's the reality: every single large, methodologically sound study of home birth has shown that low-risk women delivering with a trained attendant have BETTER outcomes at home. That is, there are fewer birth injuries, surgeries and infections, with no increase in morbidity or mortality for mother or child.
Birth is not passive - a safe natural birth is like an intense athletic event in which the mother will do best if she is as relaxed and comfortable as possible. Most women will give birth most easily where they feel safest - at home. For many women, the hospital setting slows or stops labor and exhausts them, and some medical interventions may contribute to complications; for instance, an epidural may prevent a woman from positioning herself in the most effective way. Many women are sectioned because the baby is "too large" - although delivering on hands and knees would open the birth canal enough to let the baby be born naturally.
Because the home setting has such value in making birth easier and safer, many countries integrate home birth services with medical backup. These countries have the best maternal and infant mortality rates. The United States does not, and the primary reason is that obstetricians in the US, unlike many of their colleagues elsewhere, chose to fight midwives for market share rather than collaborate with them.
They fight dirty: the ACOG journal has refused to publish positive studies of home birth, but heavily publicizes junk studies whose own authors admit their limitations. The ACOG knows few will read past the headline.
They're wrong. Hospital birth for all women regardless of risk and preference costs more, hurts more and kills more women and babies.
Tell the women in Africa how
Sun, 07/11/2010 - 21:49 — Anonymous (not verified)Tell the women in Africa how lovely it is to have a baby at home.
From the ACOG (quoting the
Mon, 07/12/2010 - 07:08 — Anonymous (not verified)From the ACOG (quoting the article above):
"Childbirth decisions should not be dictated or influenced by what's fashionable, trendy, or the latest cause célèbre."
"Fashionable" and "trendy" might also be employed to describe the ACOG's love affair withthe C-section and otherinvasive delivery procedures so widespread in U.S. obstetrical practice.
U.S. maternal/infant mortality rates are alarmingly high, and as commenters above have noted, the ACOG is not going to lower them through increasingly invasive procedures. The countries with the lowest mortality rates provide universal health care for all women regardless of their financial means, and that's that.
I recently gave birth at
Mon, 07/12/2010 - 12:58 — Jillian (not verified)I recently gave birth at home just after completing an intensive midwifery apprenticeship and passing my licensing exam to become a Certified Professional Midwife (C.P.M). I chose this option after having attended many beautiful out-of-hospital births and also witnessing many hospital transfers. I chose this option having seen both emergent and non-emergent transfers to the hospital because I know that when in the hands of trained, and skilled midwives the choice to transfer is made in a timely manner and the outcomes are good. C.P.M's here in the United States are well trained, having completed course work and/or demonstrating their skill proficiency before a licensing official as well as completing and passing an 8 hour written exam. They are skilled in determining and selecting women for homebirth who are in a low risk category. In addition they are trained to carefully manage women in labor and to consider and/or carry out transport in the event that the labor becomes high risk. Depending on the state in which she practices a C.P.M may also carry anti-hemorrhagic medications such as pitocin or methergine in order to manage and stop hemorrhage in the home setting.
In addition to being a safe choice, homebirth is often more satisfying and empowering for mothers. It is a chance for mothers to take charge of their bodies and birth experience. At home women have a greater say in how and where they give birth. They can choose from varying positions and postures and may also give birth in water. They are allowed to give birth on their own terms and in their own time. In the home setting there are fewer absolutes and women are given more time to labor and allow their cervixes to dilate. The home is also an ideal setting for the easing of both mother and baby into their new relationship. It is more conducive to the delicate processes of bonding and breastfeeding and allows for the entire family to be an active part of the experience from beginning to baby. Women may also be satisfied by the option to build a relationship with their midwife/ves and know in advance who will be attending their birth. Overall homebirth is an amazing option for low risk women and should be made available across the globe.
*I gave birth to Leland Patrick Scott Lynch on March 11th 2009 at 6:56 pm. He was born in the water at our home and was caught by his papa and I. My labor was short and smooth and pushing expansive, exhilarating and ecstatic. I was able to push my son right into my husband's hands and mine, making us, his parents the first people to ever touch him. In addition the most loving of people surrounded us, an adoring group of women, friends and midwives all smiling and supporting us through the process. (It helped that my midwives were my closest friends) I could not have had a more satisfying or beautiful birth experience and wish all women the option and opportunity to seek the same.
Women in Africa have
Mon, 07/12/2010 - 13:09 — Jillian (not verified)Women in Africa have extremely poor birth outcomes due to poor nutrition, socio-economics, and lack of access to qualified health care practitioners during labor. In other words they are predisposed to hemorrhage and have no care providers present or even close to near by. These are not low-risk american women giving birth at home with skilled care providers. This is not even a relevant comparison. A relevant comparison would be women in Sweden or the Netherlands who have very high home birth rates with trained, skilled care providers and some of the best maternal infant outcomes!
prada outlet
Thu, 11/01/2012 - 06:21 — Haugtaby (not verified)must look at this prada outlet for more zfdljZUk http://www.prada--outlet.org/