The Other Side of the Glass

Part One was officially released June 2013 in digital distribution format. To purchase to to If you were a donor and want to download your copy send an email to

The trailer

Monday, January 29, 2007

What do you think? When babies die regardless of location.

What about those situations when no matter what one does the outcome is that the baby doesn't live?

“ …. we don't know if they'd have been fine at home! But...the same is true of homebirth deaths. We don't KNOW if being at the hospital would have saved them.”
--- Heather B. on this blog

This circular argument has been going on regarding hospital versus homebirth deaths for mother and baby -- for a long time. It can’t be answered. It can’t be researched. While people debate it mothers and babies are dying and being harmed in medical birth and in improper homebirths. Physicians and midwives bear the moral and legal responsibility for the women and babies.

I am sharing below the experience of an obstetric resident caught in the middle between trusting nature, honoring woman's choices, and going against what he was being taught is necessary because “birth is a medical crisis” (and that maintains the system that pays him and his malpractice insurance). The resident supports her wishes and he advocates for her and the outcome is not a healthy, live baby. It is tragic for every one involved. Who is "responsible" will always be the first and last question -- too often settled in court.

His experience in the birth of a baby born brain dead is a perfect representation of all aspects of birth in our society that are being debated about not only WHERE is a baby safe, but what care provides safety while respecting the mother's body, choices, decisions, and responsibility. How can this society develop the best and safest care for the baby and respect the needs of all parties, including the physician and midwives.

My intent is to engage women, obstetricians, nurses, psychologists, malpractice attorneys, educators……anyone who wishes to contribute to making birth safer wherever a woman chooses to give birth -- home, birth center, or hospital. This effort to reform birth practices and develop partnerships between midwives and physicians is so that our society focuses on the well being of humans from conception on. It is so babies are not only born alive, but that they are conceived, gestated, labor, and are born with the least drama and trauma possible.

In order to facilitate what I have proposed here -- a beginning of coming together of all parties to dialog -- in order to heal birth, I invite you, whoever you are, to respond to the following correspondence from a second year resident in an obstetric residency program in an inner city Chicago hospital.

This story is about a woman who comes to the hospital wishing to claim her body and birth and be without interventions. To do so in a hospital, a woman must come to that place very defensive and resistant. It is very eerily similar to many homebirths that result in fetal death -- the mother's wishes are supported and the need for emergency care happens fast and too late. This story is likely to have ended the exact same way if the mother had chosen to birth at home.

In our society, regardless of the best efforts by a mother and her medical caregiver, clearly some babies will die. The attitude prevails that “someone has to pay” and there are plenty of malpractice lawyers to take up the cause. For damaged, but living human beings there is a huge cost on many levels for the family. Our society does pay to support their care and treatment, often life long services. A myriad of social service programs and therapists will be paid by taxpayer money to provide for the child, often for decades. The resident's heart-felt questions about this, "who will take care of the brain dead child" are touching. This baby's birth and death, while trying to "do birth right" was a turning point situation for this resident -- he stepped out the "between a rock and a hard place" and into the medical machinery. The pressure from all sides -- family, legal teams, attendings, etc -- is too much. Living with the questions of self-doubt and losing a baby is life changing for a physician (or nurse or midwife.)

How can we give women power over their bodies and choices in birthing their babies, and support those caregivers -- physician, nurse, or midwife -- to also be cared for and supported?

This is an opportunity to express your concerns and needs, either personally or professionally, but it must be done with respect and regard for the differences of others and their choice, especially the mother, baby, and family, and resident. I am looking for sincere answers as this story demonstrates what I believe are big issues.

1) Doctors are disproportionately responsible for birth outcomes ;

2) Legal liability of any caregiver - physician or midwife allowing the mother to make the choice and how to personally live with the consequences; because

3) Sometimes babies will die regardless of where, or with whom, the mother and baby give birth.

Remember the FOCUS is the HUMAN BABY in relationship to the mother and family, and what a baby needs to be safe and supported, nurtured, and to be born according to his or her own biological impulse (physiological science tells us the baby begins labor).

Rules of engagement

1. Use “I” statements and refer to people in general as "one" as "you" often creates misunderstandings.
2. Express your perspective as your own
3. No personal attacking of individuals or groups
4. I reserve the right to not publish those that are offensive or attacking
5. Consider the Four Agreements by Miguel Ruiz as a guide
-- Be Impeccable with Your Word (say what you mean, mean what you say and don't gossip)
-- Don't Take Things Personally (love you or hate you -- others project their beliefs)
-- Don't Make Assumptions (what you assume is more about yourself and your beliefs)
-- Do Your Best Everyday (and acknowledge others doing their best are as well)

Last night I had a woman who was at the hospital as she was in labor. Her family did not want to take her home and when in pain after offering her different methods of pain relief she refused. Then she continued to labor very slowly (doing it all on her own) after rupturing her membranes on her own earlier in the morning. She only allowed us to examine her a few times and by the way she was progressing I knew that it was going to be a long night. The baby's heart rate was now in the 180's and she would not allow us to intervene. At 1230 yesterday night I got a call from the nurses to perform a stat c-section for absence of fetal heart tones. I was in the operating room at 1231 and tested the mom’s stomach for adequate anesthesia. She screamed in pain, but after 6 minutes she was under general anesthesia and I made the first incision and had the baby out in 40 seconds. When I pulled the baby’s head out it appeared limp and when I pulled the rest of the body out it appeared lifeless with no pulse in the cord which I clamped. I placed the lifeless infant in the isolette and after fifteen minutes they were able to revive the infant but had to place it on a ventilator. Both its pupils were already fixed suggesting massive hemorrhage in the brain.

After the neonatologist informed the parents of the baby’s condition they both hugged one another and started to cry. Later they both asked the staff and me what went wrong?
If you want to labor on your own no one should stop you. Yes, it was the right of the woman to refuse anesthesia/epidural, and to refuse monitoring; but now she has a brain dead infant and is looking for answers which only God has the answers to and it is God who would have predicted the outcome. But who is standing up for the baby who is now going to be in a vegetative state.  

Who is going to pay for it? Which one of the women who supported this woman in her decisions is going to give her comfort? Which one is going to pay her expensive medical bills and who is going to help her raise child that is possibly going to be in a vegetative state for a long time, if not forever?

The middle ground exists in other countries where they have home births, birthing rooms, and hospitals. Some women have good outcomes and some women have bad outcomes in all populations those in a hospital setting to those in a home setting.

Fight the good battle which ever side you’re on but make sure that you’re there to support your side when the going is bad.


Heather B. said...

Wow, as if refusing an epidural had any impact on whether or not the baby was born braindead. Her labor was progressing slowly. Why would she want to slow things down even more by having an epidural? Monitors don't prevent cerebral palsy anyway nor do they always catch fetl distress.

Baby Keeper said...

The epidural was just part of the narrative -- part of the "normal" process of birth in the hospital, not his main point.

What I want to discuss is how THE RESIDENT PHYSICIAN did in the hospital what natural and homebirthers want in their births -- with a "bad outcome" and who does society say is to blame and to take responsibilty??

His questions in green are what I would like feedback on.

WE all fuss about the liability issue that drives decision-making and medical management of birth, and the drama around where birth is safest. Here is a birth managed just like a midwifery birth (as this resident wanted to do in practice but partially due to lack of systemic support to do so and certainly lack of emotional for personally dealing with the outcome -- death of a baby was "beat" and "numbed" into submission himself.)

Here's a big problem in the US maternal health care system. Why should a doctor or a midwife provide a woman with all she needs AND be legally responsible when it goes wrong? Often parents of severely handicapped children sue in order to pay for care of the child.

We need to support caregivers in the system in order to make changes. We need to support those who support the woman wherever birth is --- and acknowledge how they are humans who have feelings. It is a horrible thing for a physician or midwife when a baby or mother dies.

I am using this story BECAUSE he gave her the care she asked for -- from his perception, anyway -- and it sounds like the care a midwife would provide. Even moreso than the some of the medical-midwives.

Some babies die regardless and it is not the fault of the caregivers. How can we make birth safe and change liability issues?

Anonymous said...

"How can we make birth safe and change liability issues?"

To the former, you can't. There will always be a proportion of babies who die, no matter how small that proportion becomes.

As for liability issues, that one's a little more tricky. Basically, it relies on people to take responsibility for the decisions that they make regarding their health and I mean that across the board, and not just for pregnancy and birth. Most people are conditioned these days into thinking that not only are doctors always right, but that they can fix anything and everything. This simply isn't true and never will be. But while we live in a world where blame has to be apportioned and people absolve themselves from responsibility for their choices, not a lot is going to change.

Me personally, I take full responsibility for any decisions regarding my health. That means I look at what the worst case might be in any given decision and decide whether I am happy with that outcome should I be really unlucky. I don't blame anyone else for my choices. They are mine alone. But I do know that I'm unusual in that attitude. So as far as answering the questions in green is concerned, the woman that chose to refuse monitoring is the person who, along with her partner, is the one who ultimately needs to foot the bill and raise the child. Society might help to the extent that there is help available for those dealing with disability, but ultimately, any child is their parent's responsibility. So perhaps in order to avoid costly litigation, when it is no one's fault per se (except, arguably, the mother's), there should be better provision by the government to help those who need it.

The sooner society can acknowledge that sometimes things don't go to plan, the sooner we can move past litigation and into providing genuinely patient centred care.

Anonymous said...

this is completely off topic but it bothered me...please use the term "childcare" and not "daycare"...the latter is inappropriate (ask an early childhood specialist why) thanks!! :)

Baby Keeper said...

Child care versus day care -- what post or to what is this in reference to?

Heather B. said...

I say daycare all the time. I call myself a home daycare provider. Other parents call my house daycare. What's inappropriate? I am providing care during the day while the parents are at work, hence the term day care. I consider childcare to be the field, but that could include weekend or evening care. I find daycare is more descriptive of my working hours.

Jon Daley said...

"Physicians and midwives bear the moral and legal responsibility for the women and babies."


I think this is the main problem with the hospital vs. homebirth debate. The doctors I talk to feel that it is their legal responsibility, and so make medical decisions based on legal advice, rather than medical.

Baby Keeper said...

Jon Daley -- thanks for the post. I agree -- it is a major issue in the homebirth versus hospital debate. This resident completed his training and did not practice obstetrics as malpractice rates kept him from doing private practice where he could practice autonmously as in not dictated by hospital procedures based on litigation prevention. He said, "I didn't know I was going to have to practice law as a physician."

Midwives are only going to experience what doctors have come to experience. Litigation for midwives is going to follow the same path as it has for doctors. That is one of the points I wanted to make with this story. The circular debate is moot -- the baby in this story would have likely had the same outcome at a homebirth, giving us a moral and legal double-bind for mother and doctor to both deal with. The resident is devastated -- on several levels. He has honored the woman's requests. Everything we know about birth tells us it should have been an awesome birth for both mother and baby -- allowed to progress naturally with her making the decisions. Unfortunately, he is in a system where he is now wrong and "failied" as per his attendings and peers. "Why didn't you monitor her?" EVEN though it is shown that monitoring does not change outcomes, BUT he would have been better off liability wise to have used all the technology and drugs.

Even when these are shown to cause more problems, liability wise, the doctor is better off. But he is ever, or is a midwife ever, when a baby dies or is seriously handicapped? What is in place in our society, legal system, and our individual minds that allows a woman and her baby to live the course of their birth experience, even if it is death? ANd, critically, what is in place in the medical machine to support a physician, such as this resident to deal with his grief?? A counselor to TALK about it? While the system physically, emotionally and psychologically punishes and stigmatizes?

The mother/family in this story could sue the hospital, attendings, residents, and nurses. I am guessing that with every baby death either place, WHO IS TO BLAME is one the first questions.

Malpractice reform that looks seriously at the evidence-based research in obstetrics, the lack of a standard of care based on evidence, not personal preferences and staff needs from state to state to state, hospital to hospital, doctor to doctor, and nurse to nurse. Women cared for for in inner city hospitals with majority of medicaid paid births receive different care from suburban hospitals. Women in MO have different care than women in Washington state. Some doctors SUPPORT VBAC (like the only doctor in Phoenix who does so who attended my grandson's VBAC. Some doctors refuse to use Cytotec ( a resident I spoke with in Phoenix) and some believe it is the only way to induce (an OB in MO). Some prefer to use epidural minimally and some begin the indoctrination process to use it in the first visit. A woman arriving at hospital at 7cm is screaming through the short labor and birth for her epidural: "MY doctor said I was to have epidural!" Some nurses allow babies to be left on their mother's chest for interventions. Some believe the baby has to be forced to the breast immediately; some not all at.

There are two things to determine the birth process that is so individual from person-to-person.

1) The evidence-based research should prevail. Research showing safety for the human baby should dictate what is used.

2) Maternal choice and RESPONSIBILITY from PRECONCEPTION through INFANCY, including LABOR AND BIRTH.

Birthing a baby is a significant experience in her body, mind, and soul. As the resident in the story indicated, she and the family will have to live with this their whole lives. Either way, they do. They can live their lives angry and blaming as many "victims" of the medical machine do, or they can living their lives processing and living with their choices.

Feminists want economic power, and they want family leave and quality, affordable child care, but I propose it won't happen until women claim responsibilty for their bodies and their choices.

Doctors are so screwed. They can't stop doing what they are doing that is creating more liability. Like rats on a wheel. The future holds the same for midwives (home)and does now for medwives* (hospital) if the fundamental issues of responsibility and science that shows the physiological needs of birth are not adhered to.

*Midwives (home) and medwives (hospital). Out of the controversies of "waa-waa-she-called-me-a-name" comes a way to differeniate those in the hospital and those who give care at home.

Baby Keeper said...

"So perhaps in order to avoid costly litigation, when it is no one's fault per se (except, arguably, the mother's), there should be better provision by the government to help those who need it."

Why should the government -- the PEOPLE, the tax payers -- pay to care for children who are damaged in birth, especially since we know that much of what is done medically unnecessary but to avoid malpractice. Doctors get to run up the tab, paid by third parties, to avoid law suits, or for convenience and schedule planning, and the majority of people making less money and paying taxes get to pay for it? While everyone bitches about the doctor's and lawyer's luxury homes and cars, and golfing instead of at the hospital?

Anonymous said...

"Why should the government -- the PEOPLE, the tax payers -- pay to care for children who are damaged in birth, especially since we know that much of what is done medically unnecessary but to avoid malpractice."

Because if they did, then it could (theoretically) pave the way for practises to changes so that they weren't to avoid malpractise suits, but were a result of evidence based, best practise.

That's really the whole point. Whilst blame WILL be cast, nothing will change and it's only going to get worst for anything which deviates even slightly from the norm. Whereas if emphasis was shifted away from blaming to dealing, there is an opportunity to change. This doctor did nothing wrong. He respected the woman's wishes. She chose not to have monitoring and it is arguable whether this could actually have changed anything if he'd overrode her wishes. In these circumstances, no one is really to "blame" - it's just one of those things. As it stands, she could still sue the hospital and stand a good chance of making mega bucks, so there is no real onus on anyone to change to more woman centred care. Whereas if there were a central government sponsored fund, practise could truly reflect BEST practise, which would in theory drive the need for payment to birth damaged babies right down.

At the moment, everyone pays in insurance and fees. So if everyone is paying anyway, what's the difference if it comes out of a central fund? And if that fund is improving care and reducing harm, then long term, it's going to be cheaper than the current system, since fewer families will be affected.

Baby Keeper said...

"This doctor did nothing wrong. He respected the woman's wishes. She chose not to have monitoring and it is arguable whether this could actually have changed anything if he'd overrode her wishes."

From what I know, I agree. But the paradigm of our society -- in every aspect of life -- is that someone is to blame and has to pay us for our suffering. It is likely in that hospital that the woman was poor and Mexican or American African -- both with higher neonatal rates than whites (can I say white?). Her life was likely very stressful, maybe not as nourishing etc. Prenatal factors are shown in the scientific research to be critical for outcomes at birth as well as predictive.

Prenatal care:
The important period is the prenatal time, and yet even today prenatal visits amount to virtually nothing in the health care system - especially in the 70's and 80's when I had three of my four children. Weight, BP, check the ankles, "How are you?" "Fine." "See you next month then." No discussion then or in the 93 of emotional needs, quality of life, stresses, concerns for labor and birth. It's nice they assumed every woman just knew and would be fine, but there is no effort to develop relationship with the woman and to learn of her plans. Even now the main difference in a prenatal visit is in testing -- many unreliable and/or invasive. And, doctors are forced more and more to engage with women and to listen to their plans. Unless one are seeking a certain experience, most women get the "basic plan" -- the "cookie cutter" birth.
Mortality rates have not improved in relationship to the advancement of tests.

"Because if they did (govt assist families), then it could (theoretically) pave the way for practises to changes so that they weren't to avoid malpractise suits, but were a result of evidence based, best practise."

And, since the "pony is out of the gate for too long now" (the that US cesection rate is 30% based and planned csections and inductions have been promoted as safe by physician) how would the medical community possibly pull back from all of it's pronouncements of what is right and safe -- even though shown not to be scientific based practices. How does a system of doctors trained in birth as a dysfunction in need of management, trained in pain relief of mother as central need, and trained that baby's do not remember birth because brain being nonfunctional during labor and birth -- how do they stop doing what they know to be true? Or, stop doing what they might come to know harms mothers and babies? Or, say, gosh, we were mistaken and misinformed and not get persecuted?

"Whereas if there were a central government sponsored fund, practise could truly reflect BEST practise, which would in theory drive the need for payment to birth damaged babies right down."

In the states of Indiana and New York in the ninties some groups tried to get such fund started. The doctor, the hospital, and the insurance company would each put in $300 for every birth, so that for $900 per birth went into a fund. Families of a baby who need services could then seek assistance from this fund.

And, finally, WHAT about the true malpractices situations? What with the "good ole boy" network of "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" and the lack of a standard of care and no INDEPENDENT entity overseeing obstetrics, how does society stop the real malpractice or misbehavior?

A deceased or severely injured baby garners a lot of sympathy. In the late ninties a piece of research I have lost said that the highest malpractice awards by juries went to the most injured person -- EVEN when the doctor was not in the wrong. Cases where the physician were shown to be negligent, but the injuries were not severe received smaller awards. The point being that juries are just sympathic to the plight of others regardless of whether the doctor was wrong or not. Doctors and hospitals have "deep pockets".

Natural birthers and homebirthers and UC birthers are paving the way then --- most of them are choosing the birth they do in order to be responsible for their choices and their baby, and to have control over what happens to them.

Anonymous said...

"pony is out of the gate for too long now"

Unfortunately, that's the real problem. I know my idea is wonderful in theory but unworkable in practise. For things to change it's going to take a massive cultural shift in society, but that's not going to happen any time soon, especially since we're conditioned to conform and suffer from white coat syndrome.

Baby Keeper said...

For sure, it's the real problem. I do think it's workable -- the only way is a grassroots movement of women (consumers)demanding appropriate treatment by birth care givers and by citizens addressing state and especially national legislators to look at the evidence and establish a standard of care.

A change of perception and action could quickly start with the very real need and demand of legislators to consider the care of the pregnant, laboring and birthing mother and baby, and infants in Home Land Security. It's a real possibility that hospitals and doctors are not going to be available for birthing women in the event of a natural or terrorist attack.

Very quickly, our neonatal mortality rates could equal Afghanistan.

We're conditioned to conform at birth by the experience of birth --thinking the answer to the problem or process is outside the self and found in other's doing something to or for us. Drugs and interventions -- the need for and experience of is imprinted in the brain. BECAUSE... the baby is there and rememembers birth. Birth IS the EXPERIENCE of the BABY coming into this world. The baby feels whatever the mother feels and believes during labor and birth. There is tons or research on this in the primal research and pre and perinatal psych fields.

Jon Daley said...

"Natural birthers and homebirthers and UC birthers are paving the way then --- most of them are choosing the birth they do in order to be responsible for their choices and their baby, and to have control over what happens to them."

The problem is that the government doesn't agree with this philosophy, and feels that they have to step in to "help" the poor "victim", even when they don't want to be helped.

What can we do about these sorts of things? >> Friends of Judy

"Soft is the heart of a child. Do not harden it."

A public awareness reminder that things that happen behind the scenes, out of our sight, aren't always as rosy as we might think them to be. Perhaps its a restaurant cook who accidentally drops your burger on the floor before placing it on the bun and serving it to you. Here it's an overworked apathetic (pathetic) nurse giving my newborn daughter her first bath. Please comment and rate this video, so as to insure that it is viewed as widely as possible, perhaps to prevent other such abuse. -- The mother who posted this YouTube. How NOT to wash a baby on YouTube Are you going to try to tell me that "babies don't remember?" There is no difference to this baby's experience and the imprinting of her nervous system/brain and one that is held and cleaned by the mother or father either at the hospital or at home? By the way, this is probably NOT the baby's first bath. The nurse is ungloved. Medical staff protocol is that they can't handle a baby ungloved until is has been bathed (scrubbed if you've seen it) because the baby is a BIO-HAZARD -- for them. Never mind that the bio-hazard IS the baby's first line of defense against hospital germs.

Missouri Senator Louden Speaks

Finally, A Birth Film for Fathers

Part One of the "The Other Side of the Glass: Finally, A Birth Film for and about Men" was released June, 2013.

Through presentation of the current research and stories of fathers, the routine use of interventions are questioned. How we protect and support the physiological need of the human newborn attachment sequence is the foundation for creating safe birth wherever birth happens.

Based on knowing that babies are sentient beings and the experience of birth is remembered in the body, mind, and soul, fathers are asked to research for themselves what is best for their partner and baby and to prepare to protect their baby.

The film is designed for midwives, doulas, and couples, particularly fathers to work with their caregivers. Doctors and nurses in the medical environment are asked to "be kind" to the laboring, birthing baby, and newborn. They are called to be accountable for doing what science has been so clear about for decades. The mother-baby relationship is core for life. Doctors and nurses and hospital caregivers and administrators are asked to create protocols that protect the mother-baby relationship.

Men are asked to join together to address the vagaries of the medical system that harm their partner, baby and self in the process of the most defining moments of their lives. Men are asked to begin to challenge the system BEFORE they even conceive babies as there is no way to be assured of being able to protect his loved ones once they are in the medical machine, the war zone, on the conveyor belt -- some of the ways that men describe their journey into fatherhood in the medicine culture.

Donors can email to get a digital copy.
Buy the film at

The film focuses on the male baby, his journey from the womb to the world and reveals healing and integrating the mother, father, and baby's wounded birth experience. The film is about the restoring of our families, society, and world through birthing loved, protected, and nurtured males (and females, of course). It's about empowering males to support the females to birth humanity safely, lovingly, and consciously.

Finally, a birth film for fathers.

What People Are Saying About the FIlm

Well, I finally had a chance to check out the trailer and .. wow! It's nice that they're acknowledging the father has more than just cursory rights (of course mom's rights are rarely acknowledged either) and it's great that they're bringing out the impact of the experience on the newborn, but I'm really impressed that they're not shying away from the political side.

They are rightly calling what happens in every American maternity unit, every day, by its rightful name - abuse. Abuse of the newborn, abuse of the parents and their rights, abuse of the supposedly sacrosanct ethical principal of patient autonomy and the medico-legal doctrine of informed consent, which has been long ago discarded in all but name. I love it!

In the immortal words of the "shrub", "bring it on!" This film needs to be shown and if I can help facilitate or promote it, let me know.

Father in Asheville, NC

OMG'ess, I just saw the trailer and am in tears. This is so needed. I watch over and over and over as fathers get swallowed in the fear of hospitals birth practice. I need a tool like this to help fathers see how very vital it is for them to protect their partner and baby. I am torn apart every time I see a father stand back and chew his knuckle while his wife is essentially assaulted or his baby is left to lie there screaming.
Please send me more info!!!!
Carrie Hankins
CD(DONA), CCCE, Aspiring Midwife

Thanks for sharing this. It was very touching to me. I thought of my brother-in-law standing on the other side of the glass when my sister had to have a C-section with her first child because the doctor was missing his golf date. I'll never forget his pacing back and forth and my realizing that he was already a father, even though he hadn't been allowed to be with his son yet.

Margaret, Columbia, MO

In case you don't find me here

Soon, I'll be back to heavy-duty editing and it will be quiet here again. I keep thinking this blog is winding down, and then it revives. It is so important to me.

I wish I'd kept a blog of my journey with this film this past 10 months. It's been amazing.

I have a new blog address for the film, and will keep a journal of simple reporting of the journey for the rest of the film.

I'll be heading east this week to meet with a group of men. I plan to post pictures and clips on the film blog.

I'll keep up here when I can -- when I learn something juicy, outrageous, or inspiring related to making birth safer for the birthing baby.

Review of the film

Most of us were born surrounded by people who had no clue about how aware and feeling we were. This trailer triggers a lot of emotions for people if they have not considered the baby's needs and were not considered as a baby. Most of us born in the US were not. The final film will include detailed and profound information about the science-based, cutting-edge therapies for healing birth trauma.

The full film will have the interviews of a wider spectrum of professionals and fathers, and will include a third birth, at home, where the caregivers do a necessary intervention, suctioning, while being conscious of the baby.

The final version will feature OBs, RNs, CNMs, LM, CPM, Doulas, childbirth educators, pre and perinatal psychologists and trauma healing therapists, physiologists, neurologists, speech therapists and lots and lots of fathers -- will hopefully be done in early 2009.

The final version will include the science needed to advocated for delayed cord clamping, and the science that shows when a baby needs to be suctioned and addresses other interventions. Experts in conscious parenting will teach how to be present with a sentient newborn in a conscious, gentle way -- especially when administering life-saving techniques.

The goal is to keep the baby in the mother's arms so that the baby gets all of his or her placental blood and to avoid unnecessary, violating, and abusive touch and interactions. When we do that, whether at home or hospital, with doctor or midwife, the birth is safe for the father. The "trick" for birthing men and women is how to make it happen in the hospital.

Birth Trauma Healing

Ani DeFranco Speaks About Her Homebirth

"Self-Evident" by Ani DeFranco

Patrick Houser at

Colin speaks out about interventions at birth