Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Record Number of Moms Are Giving Birth at Home … Without Help

Posted by on May. 7, 2015 at 6:51 AM
  • 7 Replies

Record Number of Moms Are Giving Birth at Home … Without Help

mom home birth baby

For moms-to-be considering a home birth, there's good news: You're definitely not alone. New research shows that unsupervised home births are on the rise, and have increased by 79 percent in the United States in the past eight years.

According to new research that will be presented at the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' annual meeting this week, there were 5,000 reported unsupervised births in 2007, and more than 8,800 in 2012. That increase may seem small, but it's concerning, say doctors.

Between 2007 and 2012, there were more than 24 million new babies born. The study shows that approximately 141,000 were home births. On top of that, 30 percent of those home births were unsupervised by professionals.

These "Do-It-Yourself" births have no midwife, physician, or doctor present, and were determined by counting the birth certificates of newborns that were signed solely by their parents.

And there are several worthy trends. The study shows that women who already had children were more likely to choose a home birth for their second (and subsequent) children. In fact, there was an 82 percent increase in home birth for women who already had children. But there was also an increase in first-time moms choosing home births, for a total growth of about 65 percent.

Though doctors were unable to definitively determine why women chose these home births (maybe they weren't planned, a mom didn't have time to arrive at a hospital, or it was in a state that didn't legally recognize midwives), the numbers don't lie. 

Home births are on the rise, and more and more moms are bucking the idea of hospital births in favor of a do-it-yourself delivery. 

Would you consider a DIY home birth?

 

Image via ChameleonsEye/shutterstock

by on May. 7, 2015 at 6:51 AM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-7):
StreetsAhead
by Silver Member on May. 7, 2015 at 9:21 AM
No I wouldn't
But can see the appeal when it appears that it most of the U.S. You have to choose between doctor or midwife, highly medicalised or not.
Here with the mix I wouldn't though
Mom2Just1
by Platinum Member on May. 7, 2015 at 9:43 AM
Nope
kelly5678
by Member on May. 7, 2015 at 12:27 PM

It's a no for me too. We're paying for medical assistance so why not get it?

la_bella_vita
by on May. 7, 2015 at 4:08 PM

No

zdtmok
by on May. 7, 2015 at 5:05 PM
My first was an unassisted, unplanned homebirth. Since then, I've had my midwife with me.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
othermom
by Silver Member on May. 7, 2015 at 7:36 PM

No I would not. My middle child was having trouble do to a short umbilical cord and it was having her heart rate to drop and I had to push in between contractions to get her out as fast as possible or would have needed a c-section. My youngest had the cord around her neck and was blue when born and the doctor was able to handle it calmly and remove the cord and she was fine

GodsAmiga
by Silver Member on May. 7, 2015 at 9:56 PM

My fourth (and last) baby was an unplanned unassisted homebirth. Despite that, if I had chosen it, I would not have wanted it to be unassisted it was still amazing. My second was unassisted as well but she was born in the car on the way to the hospital. 

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)