Despite claims in 2007, advising hospital births were preferable to home births, the NHS is now claiming that home births are normal, safe, and better than hospital delivery.
Mark Baker, the clinical director of the National Institute for National Health and Care Excellence (NICE), has said, ‘A home birth is generally safer than hospital for pregnant women at low risk of complications who have given birth before.’
The other, less advertised, perk of home births, is the low cost it has on the NHS.
Professionals are now adding that another complication of in-hospital delivery is the spread of infection. Home-birth campaigners seem to have finally had their voices heard, as it is gradually becoming normal for GPs to suggest home births with a midwife to young couples and older couples alike.
The obvious question is, why don’t hospitals resolve the infection risk in hospitals? Surely this would be a wiser long term goal. After all, if there are birthing complications, if the mother-to-be and baby are both in the hospital already, they can receive the appropriate care within seconds. As opposed to being at home and then being rushed into the hospital and waiting for care.
However, the NHS is facing sufficient scrutiny on all fronts, and whether this is a short-lived money saving stint remains to be seen.