Why is bill good?
- It's pro-life: a 1991 study found midwife-assisted births had 19% lower infant mortality rates than physician-assisted births.
- It's pro-choice: women have more control over the conditions in which they will give birth. More control and familiar surroundings mean more comfort and possibly shorter, easier labor (anyone voting against shorter labor wasn't paying attention in the delivery room).
- It cuts health care costs: C-sections happen half as often in midwife-attended births, and C-sections are expensive.
The 2007 Legislature had a chance to pass legislation allowing independent midwifery. District 8 Representative Russ Olson (R-Madison) voted for it (yay!). Otherwise pompous bloviator, law-twister, and woman-degrader Rep. Roger Hunt (R-Brandon) voted for it. But Rep. Dave Gassman (D-Canova) voted with the majority against it. Get with the program, Dave!
Midwifery makes good sense. Women deserve the right to choose how they want to bring their children into the world. Let's get the state out of the business of making medical decisions for women. SB 34 is pro-woman and pro-baby. Let's pass it!
"Let's get the state out of the business of making medical decisions for women."
ReplyDeleteAMEN!!
While I think midwives are a good idea, there will have to be very fine screening for moms. I, myself, did not develope complications until 39 weeks. And things can go bad quickly. But if women know the risks, they should be able to have that option, if they are low risk.
ReplyDeleteThere are also different types of midwives, some just go to a midwifery school, others are RN's first. I'm not educated enough to know if one is better, or if both are covered in the bill. But choice is good.