These issues come under different headings, such as risk, cost, and practical matters such as distance the midwife needs to travel.
'Risk' - however defined - is a major obstacle. The narrow definition of risk declares that every birth carries substantial risk, and that the only responsible place for birth to take place is in hospital. This narrow mindedness is not informed by evidence or by logic.
The next level of risk puts it this way: It's OK to plan homebirth if everything is normal, and excludes significant numbers of women in the birthing population, such as those who have had a previous caesarean birth.
With the increased availability of publicly funded, hospital based homebirth programs, women who decline some 'standard' test or investigation are excluded. A woman who makes what she considers to be an informed decision to avoid exposing her unborn child to routine ultrasound is told she is not permitted to continue in the homebirth program. Similarly, a woman who indicates her desire to have an unmedicated/unmanaged third stage is told she can do that in hospital, but not at home.
Most readers of this blog probably realise that these restrictions that exist in our world today are based more on fear of birth than potential risk to the woman or her baby.
These distorted and uninformed responses to perceived risk should be discussed critically by midwives who understand the protective effect that is achieved when a well woman works in harmony with natural physiological processes. Yet midwives say very little.
These distorted and uninformed responses to perceived risk should be addressed logically and carefully by the maternity decision-makers in mainstream hospitals, providing suitable pathways for women whose risk status is not at the bottom of the ladder. An obvious pathway is that a midwife who the woman trusts is available to attend as primary carer throughout the episode of care. Yet the only place a woman can have her own midwife as her primary carer is in privately attended homebirth. Public hospitals in Melbourne seem to be more committed than ever to preventing midwives from having clinical privileges/visiting access. When midwives do attend a woman in a public hospital they often experience rudeness and disrespect towards the woman and themselves.
$$ Cost is significant in private homebirth. While the midwives need to make enough money to sustain their practices, the cost of the service needs to be acceptable to the women who employ midwives. Medicare rebates for antenatal and postnatal services are small by comparison with the fees that midwives are charging. For example, a woman in my care will pay me approximately $2,500 for the episode of care, and may receive $500-$700 in Medicare rebate. The Medicare rebate for intrapartum midwifery services is limited to hospital births with a Medicare-eligible midwife, and as mentioned, that is not an option.
The other factor in cost of private homebirth is the number of midwives. Traditionally midwives have often worked in pairs, and many of my colleagues, particularly around Melbourne, require two midwives to be booked for homebirth, bringing the expected cost of the booking to $5000 or more. A recent statement by a Sydney midwife-academic to a coroner's inquest indicated her belief that two midwives are an essential part of planned homebirth. I disagree. Strongly!
I have been told that some women who want to plan homebirth have chosen an unregulated woman (doula) as a cheaper alternative to two midwives. I cannot support this option - it scares me. I wonder if midwives who demand the 'two midwives' rule feel any responsibility for the apparently increasing rates of planned 'freebirth', either with or without a doula? A doula speaking to me recently indicated that a woman she has met is considering freebirth, "with me there just to support her".
Practical matters: the main one that comes to mind is the distance across this wide brown land. Gone are the days of the village midwife on her bike. Each time I visit a client, I am using precious fuel. Likewise, each time a woman comes to me. If a woman lives closer to another private midwife, I will always ask her to consider employing that midwife. (An exception is a few special women who I have attended on several occasions over the years. I have become a part of those families, and it's lovely to return for the birth of the next baby.)
Speaking practically, there's no reason why midwives in every town and city across this country should not be able and willing to attend women locally for birth, guiding the women as to their need to be attended in hospital, or at home. Ageing midwives like me should not be needing to drive an hour or two in our cars to get to the women.
Yet the culture of fear and distrust of birth has destroyed midwives' confidence in their own ability to be 'with woman'.
What am I saying?
I believe midwives need to take more assertive action to promote and protect normal birth, including homebirth.
- midwives need to think critically about risk
- midwives need to work to make primary maternity care by a known midwife affordable
- midwives need to wake up to their capacity to provide midwifery services in homes and hospitals, for all women.