Heather Sassine1, Elaine Burns2, Simone Ormsby3, Hannah G Dahlen4. 1. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South, NSW 2751, Australia. Electronic address: heather@heathersassine.com. 2. Western Sydney University, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South, NSW 2751, Australia. Electronic address: e.burns@westernsydney.edu.au. 3. Western Sydney University, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South, NSW 2751, Australia. Electronic address: simone.ormsby@westernsydney.edu.au. 4. Western Sydney University, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South, NSW 2751, Australia. Electronic address: h.dahlen@westernsydney.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Australia there have been regulatory and insurance changes negatively affecting homebirth. AIM: The aim of this study is to explore the characteristics, needs and experiences of women choosing to have a homebirth in Australia. METHODS: A national survey was conducted and promoted through social media networks to women who have planned a homebirth in Australia. Data were analysed to generate descriptive statistics. FINDINGS: 1681 surveys were analysed. The majority of women indicated a preference to give birth at home with a registered midwife. However, if a midwife was not available, half of the respondents indicated they would give birth without a registered midwife (freebirth) or find an unregistered birthworker. A further 30% said they would plan a hospital or birth centre birth. In choosing homebirth, women disclosed that they wanted to avoid specific medical interventions and the medicalised hospital environment. Nearly 60% of women reported at least one risk factor that would have excluded them from a publicly funded homebirth programme. Many women described their previous hospital experience as traumatic (32%) and in some cases, leading to a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD, 6%). Only 5% of women who reported on their homebirth experience considered it to be traumatic (PTSD, 1%). The majority of these were associated with how they were treated when transferred to hospital in labour. CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need to expand homebirth options in Australia and humanise mainstream maternity care. A potential rise in freebirth may be the consequences of inaction.
BACKGROUND: In Australia there have been regulatory and insurance changes negatively affecting homebirth. AIM: The aim of this study is to explore the characteristics, needs and experiences of women choosing to have a homebirth in Australia. METHODS: A national survey was conducted and promoted through social media networks to women who have planned a homebirth in Australia. Data were analysed to generate descriptive statistics. FINDINGS: 1681 surveys were analysed. The majority of women indicated a preference to give birth at home with a registered midwife. However, if a midwife was not available, half of the respondents indicated they would give birth without a registered midwife (freebirth) or find an unregistered birthworker. A further 30% said they would plan a hospital or birth centre birth. In choosing homebirth, women disclosed that they wanted to avoid specific medical interventions and the medicalised hospital environment. Nearly 60% of women reported at least one risk factor that would have excluded them from a publicly funded homebirth programme. Many women described their previous hospital experience as traumatic (32%) and in some cases, leading to a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD, 6%). Only 5% of women who reported on their homebirth experience considered it to be traumatic (PTSD, 1%). The majority of these were associated with how they were treated when transferred to hospital in labour. CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need to expand homebirth options in Australia and humanise mainstream maternity care. A potential rise in freebirth may be the consequences of inaction.
Authors: Girma A Wami; Viktória Prémusz; György M Csákány; Kovács Kálmán; Viola Vértes; Péter Tamás Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-08-22 Impact factor: 4.614