[colliric]

Yes, but a trained nurse should also be present with their own mini-ambulance and have knowledge of where the nearest Maternity Hospital is in case of an emergency.

If the patient lives too far away from a maternity hospital, they should not be allowed a planned home delivery without special circumstances (i.e for whatever reason they can't deliver the baby elsewhere, it's an emergency birth or a home birth Obstetrician is present with their equipment).

[Pants-of-dog]

Is this illegal anywhere?

[One Degree]

I would be surprised if it was ever illegal. How do you stop a woman from giving birth?

[Red_Army]

I voted other because I don't think women should be allowed to have babies anywhere.

[Sivad]

I voted other because I don't think women should be allowed to have babies anywhere.

If we did outlaw babies hilarity would ensue.

[snapdragon]

Are home births not legal in the US?

In the UK they are almost pushed onto you. It must be a cheaper option.

No they're not. What a strange thing to say. It's merely become easier to request one than it was in the past.

I woud have loved to have given birth in my own home, but although in theory it was legal, in practise they weren't enough midwives willing to do it. Modern methods have made it a lot easier.

Typical US healthcare. Anyway to get an extra dime from you.

Now, that is true. My cousin was a midwife ( now retired) who worked in the USA for two years back in the eighties.

She was never alalowed to actually deliver babies , though, because the obstetrician wanted his fee.

[JohnRawls]

Probably no, so i voted No.

Having specialists look after you to prevent the child from dying or prevent you from dying will save more lifes long term and outweighs any inconveniences that it causes. I understand this doesn't happen often, but even if it saves 1% more lives or less then it is good.

[SolarCross]

Probably no, so i voted No.

Having specialists look after you to prevent the child from dying or prevent you from dying will save more lifes long term and outweighs any inconveniences that it causes. I understand this doesn't happen often, but even if it saves 1% more lives or less then it is good.

Are you pro-choice or pro-life?

[JohnRawls]

Are you pro-choice or pro-life?

I am pro-choice. This pro-choice needs to include not just the women but also the father and the family in this choice. But i understand what you are trying to get to here.

In a sense, I would say that it is very preferable for people to give birth in hospitals instead of home because it leads to less complications and death, even if it is 1% (I don't know the statistics on this and no clue where to look).

[One Degree]

I remember way back when home births were the new thing to do. The hospitals fought this very minor competition by offering birthing rooms. They still charged you for the rooms you did not use because they were available if you needed them. Price was the same for either option. Lol

[SolarCross]

I am pro-choice. This pro-choice needs to include not just the women but also the father and the family in this choice. But i understand what you are trying to get to here.

In a sense, I would say that it is very preferable for people to give birth in hospitals instead of home because it leads to less complications and death, even if it is 1% (I don't know the statistics on this and no clue where to look).

Right so you do think a woman can choose to actively kill her unborn child but can't be allowed to a make a choice that has a very slight or unproven risk of causing accidental harm. It is a bit of a contradiction, no? Good thing you aren't a lawmaker you have no talent for it.

Here are some other things you did not consider before forming your opinion:

1. Teleportation does not exist. It is all very well asserting that hospital births are safer than home births but one has to be actually at a hospital for that benefit which means travelling there. Is travelling safer? Clearly giving birth by the roadside is the least safe environment and the reality is that some % of people frantically racing to the hospital will not make it before the final birthing process begins. That is also ignoring the risk of having other kinds of travelling accidents. Moreover your proposed ban whould be particularly punishing to rural people who may very well have to travel quite long distances to the nearest hospital.

2. Enforcement matters. A ban is just words on paper unless you intend to kick in people's doors and drag them away in cuffs to enforce it. Are you really suggesting people who birth at home should be arrested, taken to court and jailed? Given that births happen on their own schedule and thus can occur before reaching a hospital, how could you even prove that a home birth was a wilful defiance of your idiotic law and not just happenstance on the way to the hospital?

[JohnRawls]

Right so you do think a woman can choose to actively kill her unborn child but can't be allowed to a make a choice that has a very slight or unproven risk of causing accidental harm. It is a bit of a contradiction, no? Good thing you aren't a lawmaker you have no talent for it.

Here are some other things you did not consider before forming your opinion:

1. Teleportation does not exist. It is all very well asserting that hospital births are safer than home births but one has to be actually at a hospital for that benefit which means travelling there. Is travelling safer? Clearly giving birth by the roadside is the least safe environment and the reality is that some % of people frantically racing to the hospital will not make it before the final birthing process begins. That is also ignoring the risk of having other kinds of travelling accidents. Moreover your proposed ban whould be particularly punishing to rural people who may very well have to travel quite long distances to the nearest hospital.

2. Enforcement matters. A ban is just words on paper unless you intend to kick in people's doors and drag them away in cuffs to enforce it. Are you really suggesting people who birth at home should be arrested, taken to court and jailed? Given that births happen on their own schedule and thus can occur before reaching a hospital, how could you even prove that a home birth was a wilful defiance of your idiotic law and not just happenstance on the way to the hospital?

As i said, probably No in the context on this poll. But the poll is very restrictive in a sense bann or no bann. Banning birth at home is not possible as you mention and it also runs in to monetary constraints on the side of paying for private hospitals or funding the free healthcare system depending what the country uses.
There are many buts here.

In this poll there wasn't a different choice between yes or no. (There is other. Using other perhaps was a better option but i try to avoid it since it scews the whole point of the poll)

So i elaborated for you in the previous post. It is PREFERABLE but there is no realistic way to bann births at home.

[Rugoz]

Yes, babies are overrated. Parents to riskier things with grown-up children.

[jessupjonesjnr87]

Other, I don't care

[Oxymandias]

@Missus V. Spolia. @Victoribus Spolia

Depends on how trained the midwife is.

[Victoribus Spolia]

Hmmmm.

I sorta agree with you @Oxymandias.

Our experience though has been that a Mennonite Midwife with no prior medical experience who delivers hundreds of babies was far more knowledgeable about child-birth and complications that a less experienced mid-wife who had an M.D.

I could tell you stories. Believe me.

So I think it depends on what you mean by training.

I prefer actual experience over pieces of paper.

[Oxymandias]

@Victoribus Spolia

That's kind of what meant by training. Those mid-wives would get papers, not those less experienced.

[Victoribus Spolia]

Yeah, I have no problem with that.

[XogGyux]

Voted yes as there is really no way to enforce something like this, much less prevent it to a reasonable level.
Human species have been giving birth for ~200,000 years and perhaps for less than 10k years or so with significant help from "specialized" people. The mortality rate for both mother and baby did drop significantly so that's a point against trying to do it on your own but I would not call it an absolute contraindication.
There was a study comparing the UK (that has a more midwife-driven system) with the US (which is almost exclusively doctor/hospital driven) and if I remember correctly there was little difference in terms of mortality between the two while the US system being significantly more costly. That being said, the UK system for midwives was more robust with their transfer system for emergencies so as to create such a system from scratch in the US could have potentially made it more expensive. I'll look around my old NEJM magazines to see if I can find it and post the conclusions or something.
In the US, the hospital is the absolute best place to have your kid.

Our experience though has been that a Mennonite Midwife with no prior medical experience who delivers hundreds of babies was far more knowledgeable about child-birth and complications that a less experienced mid-wife who had an M.D.

I don't know what you mean with "mid-wife that had an MD". I have seen mid-wife with doctorates (nursing?, or even other fields) but they are not M.D. And if you are referring OB/GYN doctors, thats different from a midwife.
In the US, if you are thinking about experience, except perhaps on the most rural areas of the country, a hospital is where the vast majority of experienced people are. In the tiny ~200 bed community hospital, I trained in, about 30 or so beds were labor beds and about ~10 birth would occur in any 24h period more or less. That is more exposure than any midwife could get from going house to house. Like I said, house birth in the US is less common so I admit I am not 100% familiar with it, but I don't think a midwife that specializes in this would have the time or energy to attend to more than 2, maybe 3 birth per day. Compare that to at least ~10 in a tiny hospital and you'd get your answer. (This ofcourse might not apply to very rural areas where there is no a close hospital). Furthermore, when complications do occur (often to no fault of the midwife) they are hopelessly unequipped to deal with the problem, they won't do an emergency c-section.

[Rancid]

Birthing babies should be made illegal.