I sympathize for the couple that lost their baby when the midwife convinced them not to go to the hospital. I really do. However, what the hell were they thinking considering the mother of the child had three c-section children prior to this child's death?
And a midwife? No hospital? No painkillers? No doctor on hand in case something goes horribly wrong? Why?
We're in an age of miracle and wonder in the medical profession. However, none of that technology does any good if there isn't a qualified person available with all of the resources of a hospital.
I have this mental image of the mom getting a shot of whiskey to dull the pain of childbirth, and then getting sent back out into the fields when she's done - provided she lives. Given the costs of socialized medicine, maybe that's something women have to look forward to.
Ann Althouse has an interesting post regarding midwives (complete with comments), and she pulls a quote from an article concerning the prosecution of a midwife in Indiana. Here's part of it:
"Midwifery is an autonomous profession," [a midwife, Mary Helen] Ayres said. "It's an art and a science that predates the medical model of care. Midwifery sees birth as normal and basically safe.Ya know, women and children dying or suffering horribly in childbirth is natural, too. Doesn't mean that it should be excused. This is the 21st century. There's no excuse for pretending it's the Dark Ages.
"It's made safer by reliance on the woman's power," she continued. "The medical model assumes the woman is passive and her body needs to be acted upon. Every birth is presented as a potential disaster from which every woman needs to be protected and potentially rescued."
