It's Baby Time Part 2 of 3: You're Not Giving Birth in a Hospital??!

Before reading this post, make sure you read Part 1 of "It's Baby Time."  In my last post, I talked about why we want a natural childbirth and about our decision to give birth at a birth center.  Today's post is on why we don't want to give birth in a hospital.

I would like to preface these next two posts by saying that this is not meant to be a judgement on anyone else who chooses hospital births and epidurals! :)  I just wanted to explain our thought process so that others will understand why we are making the decision that we are.  Everyone is different, and no one can tell you what is right for you.  I am just advocating that families be fully informed and aware before making these kinds of decisions, and not just make choices based off of what everyone else does or out of fear.  That being said...


Why We Do Not Want to Give Birth in a Hospital

Historically speaking, in the United States, it used to be more common to NOT give birth in the hospital.  In 1940, 44% of births were out-of-hospital (U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services, 2010).  In 1969, that number had dropped to around 1% and has remained around there for several decades.  It may be uncommon to have an out-of-hospital birth in America, but comparatively, around the world a third of all births take place in the home even without a skilled attendant (World Health Organization, 2008).  Anyway, it's not about what everyone else is doing... let's look at our top reasons for not wanting to give birth in a hospital:

1) Increased risk of unneccessary medical interventions and C-sections

2) Longer recovery periods

3) Extremely expensive

1) First of all, it's not necessarily safer to give birth in the hospital!  If I go to the hospital, I have a 1-in-3 chance of having major abdominal surgery, also known as a cesarean birth (National Center for Health Statistics).  Are C-sections and other medical interventions extremely helpful and absolutely necessary at times?  YES!  But do 1-in-3 moms truly have emergencies and need a C-section?  This is not the norm!  I don't know anyone that has ever had a C-section that would advocate that it is the best way to go.  Not your ideal uplifting birth experience to be sure.  A giant cut is made in your belly, and your baby is pulled out.  Then, you can expect to stay in the hospital for 2-4 days, and recovery will take about 4-6 weeks.  Not only is it more expensive, but there are major risks from the surgery itself and from the anesthesia.  I'm not really wanting to spend my first few days or weeks with my new baby on pain killers.

Oh, and there is also a small chance that the baby could have breathing problems, be sluggish after birth, or that you may have increased bleeding requiring a blood transfusion, an infection in the incision, uterus, or nearby organs, reactions to the medications, injuries to the bowel or bladder, or blood clots.  If you've had a C-section, then you are at an increased risk in your next births for having the placenta implant to low or too deep in the uterus which can cause severe bleeding during labor and delivery.  Also, studies show that cesarean delivery has negative effects on breastfeeding, and rates of breastfeeding moms who have had c-sections versus vaginal births were significantly lower. 

But.. this isn't a post about why you don't want to have a C-section.  It's about the fact that if you go to an American hospital, you have approximately a 1-in-3 chance of getting a C-section.  And if you're induced, your risk of C-section pretty much doubles.

Once again, if I need to have an emergency C-section, I will be very thankful for the doctors and for current medical technology.  They are done for a reason, and they save many lives.  I'm just saying... there are a large majority of unnecessary things that happen in hospitals at the last minute that the mom doesn't have a lot of control over... things she may not have agreed to if she had more knowledge about the various scenarios or if she was in a different mindset.

Why are there so many C-sections?  Does it have anything to do with the fact that the people in charge are surgeons?  As written above, some argue that a large majority of C-sections are not done in case of an emergency, like they are supposed to be.  Here's one scenario that seems to be fairly common...  If you are not progressing quickly enough, according to the doctor, you will likely be given pitocin.  Well, then your contractions are going to be so intense, you will need stronger drugs to help numb the pain, so you get an epidural.  But the epidural is going to slow down your labor, so you'll need more pitocin.  It's a vicious cycle.  And as mentioned previously, if you have an epidural, you are at a much higher risk of having your blood pressure go down, which may change your baby's heart rate (your baby needs oxygen)... you get the picture.   Then, since your baby's heart rate dropped, the doctor will tell you your baby is in fetal distress, and you will be preparing for your C-section.  The baby's heart rate likely dropped because of your drugs... not just out of nowhere for no reason.  I don't think a lot of women understand this ahead of time.  Anyway, I'll write more about epidurals in "It's Baby Time Part 3."  On to the second reason we don't want to give birth in a hospital.

2) If you go to a hospital to deliver, you are going to have a longer recovery period.  The recovery period after a C-section birth is especially long.  At the birth center, we can leave when we feel comfortable (a few hours to 24 hours after) and we're not going to be charged an arm and a leg to stay there after the birth.  Which leads up to the next reason...

3) Expenses!  One of our biggest concerns pre-pregnancy was the cost of labor.  We were on individual insurance plans when we first became pregnant, and so I called about 8 hospitals in our area trying to figure out what the cost would be.  I was asking the hospitals about the cheapest route possible... vaginal birth without an epidural.  The costs averaged around $8,000 and that is NOT including additional newborn care charges or maternity provider charges. That is JUST the birth.  Assuming I don't have to go to the hospital, my cost is going to total around $3,750 at Blossom and it includes ALL of my pre-natal visits and the actual birth.  That's not to mention the compassionate and comprehensive care, the nutritional counseling, the educational videos, and that they're always available anytime I call with a concern or question.

Check out this chart on the average hospital labor and birth charges by method of birth in Arizona (also not including additional newborn care charges or maternity provider charges):

Is that eye-opening or what?  Hospitals are there to help people, but they also make quite a bit of money off of pregnant women!  I would argue too that hospitals are often about time, efficiency, and control, and labor is time-intensive and unpredictable!  Why wait 16-24 hours for a mother to give birth naturally when you can get a baby out easily and efficiently with a 20 minute surgery?  It's unfair to rob a woman of an empowering birth experience and the chance to bond with her baby right after labor, thus potentially damaging her chances to successfully breastfeed, when not absolutely necessary.  But women aren't told about the difficult recovery times and all of the disadvantages.  They just trust the doctor in charge because the doc says it's what you have to do to have the baby be okay and healthy.  Hospitals make so much money off of people having babies and I think it's insane.  Having a baby is a normal life occurrence.  Again, if something were to go wrong, they definitely serve an amazing purpose.  I'm not trying to bash on hospitals.  If we need to go to the hospital for some reason, we will gladly go and be incredibly thankful for modern day medicine and technology.  Things don't always go according to our plans.

We're not done yet!  Keep reading for, "It's Baby Time Part 3 of 3," wrapping up about epidurals.