View Single Post
March 27th, 2013, 06:49 AM
LadyMorgan LadyMorgan is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 61
Oregon is the only state that has been keeping track of information about planned site of birth, and they have only been keeping track of it for one year. Yes, the information is incomplete...but it is the best we have at this time.

Regarding your specific points:

1. As someone else pointed out, this is not a "study." These are statistics. Two very different things.

2. These statistics cover roughly 40,000 (ish) births in the state of Oregon. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly positive that there are 49 more states in this country. I'm not sure how anyone can be expected to make an informed decision based on data that is so painfully incomplete.
Hopefully other states will start to collect information on this also.

3. Where is the information detailing the cause of death in any of these scenarios? If 25 hospital births resulted in death, then we can conclude that deaths DO occur in hospitals during or shortly after labor. We can also conclude from the data that deaths occur during home births as well. However, because deaths occurred in both locations, we CANNOT conclude that the OOH deaths occurred due to the result of a lack of medical interference. We can assume all we want, but that doesn't make it true.
If the number of deaths per thousand attempted births differs between the two situations, it is likely that something is causing that difference. We can be fairly sure that if the out-of-hospital death rate is elevated, it is not due to that population being at a high-risk population, because only low-risk patients are considered candidates for out-of-hospital birth. There are plenty of things that have not been ruled out. The absence of anyone with formal medical training is one of them.

4. The number of IP deaths were not included in the in-hospital statistics. The statistics given explain this by saying that the number is extremely low and then goes on to give an estimated rate based on studies in two completely different countries. These studies are not cited.
It will be interesting to see if these numbers are in the final report.

5. The number of in-hospital deaths that were caused by congenital abnormalities is not given.
True. I suppose it is possible that a significant proportion of the in-hospital deaths were caused by congenital abnormailities, but if that were the case, surely Ms. Rooks would have separated them out also?

6. These are the statistics for 2012. Where are all the other years? One year is incomplete data.
Oregon only started requiring that planned site-of-birth be recorded on birth certificates in 2011, so 2012 is the only full year of data available.