Risk of child/mother dying is higher, but mostly if there are complications. For the most part, water birthing is relatively safe. Not getting a birth certificate, on the other hand, is not.
Here is a study which has a ton of info. To summarize, undergoing labor in a water bath just flat out is safer. Actually giving birth has mixed results, not necessarily because it’s less safe, but because there are a lot of external factors.(much of the studies featured midwives, which isn’t useful for my claim) That being said, this specific segment, which I’ve done my best to ensure it wasn’t taken out of context, is highly relevant to my claim:
Rates of newborn transfer to a hospital were lower following water birth (1.5%) than non–water birth (2.8%). Rates of adverse newborn outcomes (5-min Apgar score, 7, respiratory issues, presence of infection, and NICU admission) were each lower than 1.0% in the water-birth sample. The total rate of any respiratory issue was 1.6% in the babies born in water and 2.0% in those not born in water.
What does that at all have to do with not having a doctor present in case of a complication? Nearly 1 in 10 of all pregnancies have a complication of some sort. It doesn’t matter how safe the method usually is, if something goes unexpectedly wrong you want someone there trained to handle it.
Specific to your point, my local state run/funded hospital does offer several rooms with birthing pools and midwife lead births, they weren’t pushy in any direction regarding birthing options and were generally positive on the experience, certainly didn’t discourage the option.
Granted this is in a hospital, doctors are on hand if required and the option is removed if the pregnancy is higher risk, but a no-Doctor/kiddie-pool birth in and of itself isn’t super remarkable.
I literally don’t understand a birthing plan that doesn’t include doctors but does include kiddie pools.
Don’t try to understand it, or anything to do with “Sovereign Citizen” nonsense. It takes a unique kind of stupid to exist in that alternate reality.
I mean, is that not what they are for? It’s literally in the name.
Risk of child/mother dying is higher, but mostly if there are complications. For the most part, water birthing is relatively safe. Not getting a birth certificate, on the other hand, is not.
Which are, uh, pretty common when giving birth.
Here is a study which has a ton of info. To summarize, undergoing labor in a water bath just flat out is safer. Actually giving birth has mixed results, not necessarily because it’s less safe, but because there are a lot of external factors.(much of the studies featured midwives, which isn’t useful for my claim) That being said, this specific segment, which I’ve done my best to ensure it wasn’t taken out of context, is highly relevant to my claim:
What does that at all have to do with not having a doctor present in case of a complication? Nearly 1 in 10 of all pregnancies have a complication of some sort. It doesn’t matter how safe the method usually is, if something goes unexpectedly wrong you want someone there trained to handle it.
Specific to your point, my local state run/funded hospital does offer several rooms with birthing pools and midwife lead births, they weren’t pushy in any direction regarding birthing options and were generally positive on the experience, certainly didn’t discourage the option.
Granted this is in a hospital, doctors are on hand if required and the option is removed if the pregnancy is higher risk, but a no-Doctor/kiddie-pool birth in and of itself isn’t super remarkable.