I think both times I gave birth I fell in love with the midwife.
I had my second son at home. He was born in an inflatable pool in the corner of my living room and it was actually quite a wonderful experience. So, although I'm not some great propagandist for the home birth movement, when a few days ago I saw, with a small audience, mainly of midwives and other birth professionals, the film Freedom For Birth, I was moved.
The campaigning documentary looks at Agnes Gereb, a woman who has spent time in jail in Hungary, her home country, and remains under house arrest for helping women give birth at home. This woman is not a midwife, but an obstetrician who from within the medical profession had tried to fight the increasing medicalisation of birth, and also the way midwives were treated as "servants".
She is also at the centre of a birth rights movement that is gaining momentum, and attempting to counter some of the "unnecessary interventions" that have become commonplace in birth.
Because she was jailed, another Hungarian woman who had been helped by Ms Gereb to have her first baby at home went to the European Court of Human Rights to fight for her right to have her next child at home, challenging the hospital monopoly on birth as an infringement of her right to privacy. She won. And in its own quiet way (actually there has been very little publicity about this) this means something very dramatic for women, something that follows the right to have an abortion and other aspects of our ownership of our bodies.
It means women have a right to choose to give birth how and where we want. For most this will still be a hospital, but for others it will be elsewhere: most likely, their home.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article