Avram: I don’t know if you’re reading this but I’ll post anyway.
First of all, I’m sorry if I insulted you. Perhaps my wording came out too harsh. I meant to say that anyone witnessing a birth would know about the many things that could go wrong even in the most common ones. Never meant to insult your intelligence. I do appreciate your candidness in responding to my post. You’ve responded with equanimity – something my post did not deserve. Thank You.
The logic I wasn’t following was moving your whole family into the hospital or the car on shabbos in case of no heat. Childbirth puts a mother in very grave danger, as noted above. Just because something is natural and supposed to happen, it doesn’t mean that it is not dangerous. It just means that it will generally happen on its own. It doesn’t mean that that there wouldn’t be any negative consequences.
I do believe that less intervention is better. And as long as everything is fine you should let nature take its course. However, that is only once there are all types of personnel and equipment available for just in case. I am extremely apposed to scheduled c-sections or any section for that matter that is not done after all other options have been ruled out.
As far as the green journal stuff: It doesn’t make any point as well as the Netherlands stuff. Like I said before, people are prescreened to see if they are a candidate for home births. So the comparisons of mortality rates don’t make any sense. I just wonder what event, where it happens and what the effects were would disqualify people from being candidates.
I never said anything about home births exponentially or tripling mortality rates. Wrong address.