Infant Mortality Rates by ranking
Infant Mortality Rates by ranking
Senator Joan Heckaman
322 Second Avenue North
New Rockford, ND 58356-1712
701-947-2106 E-mail: jheckaman@nd.gov
Dear Senator Heckaman,
I was asked by Paulette Efimenko to send the following information to you to
present to the committee before this bill comes to a vote.
Regarding Senate Bill 2377 laypeople<
Listed below is the
Infant Mortality Rates by ranking
The medically dominated US maternity care system has ranked us 40th in the world.
At twelfth in the nation in 2006, North Dakota's Infant Mortality Rate, 5.6
per 1,000 live births, was still higher than 33 countries in the world.
http://www.unitedhealthfoundation.org/ahr2006/components/infantmortality.html
What the medical community doesn’t understand is that obstetricians and most
physicians are overqualified to attend normal birth.
Having an obstetrical/medical monopoly on maternity care does not produce
the best outcomes.
While the US has the highest infant mortality rate in the developed world,
we also have the highest costs. Spending money routinely medicalizing
pregnancy and birth increases the cost but does not improve the outcomes.
See “Expecting Trouble: the Myth of Prenatal Care in America” by Thomas H.
Strong Jr. MD, neonatologist and obstetrician, Prescott, Arizona.
“The Farmer and the Obstetrician” by Michel Odent, MD, director, The Primal
Health Research Centre, London.
“The Truth about Diet and Drugs in Pregnancy” by Thomas H. Brewer, MD,
co-founder, Blue Ribbon Babies.
Our ‘fee for service’ system rewards poor outcomes while financially
penalizing good outcomes.
A farmer would go broke if he treated his animals obstetrically instead of
providing them with the things that actually do create good outcomes: enough
good food, clean air and water, a safe environment, shelter, privacy for
birth and lactation.
There are no requirements that the above issues are ever incorporated in the
usual course of medical prenatal, birth, neonatal or postpartum care. This
information is not even in the curriculum of the Medical School at UND. What
is the problem that requires a solution? Who is threatened by the precious
few midwives who attend several dozen births a year in North Dakota?
Midwives have served their communities since before North Dakota was a state. Why do
some fine it necessary to criminalize their contributions to safer birth and
healthier children and families? If anyone finds out why doctors and
hospitals want a monopoly on birth, please let me know.
The time, attention and effort of medical professionals who are of the
opinion that homebirth is not safe, would be much better used to improve
maternal and infant health statistics for babies born in hospitals. A good
reference for them to use is “The Impact of Birthing Practices on
Breastfeeding: Protecting the Mother and Baby Continuum” by Mary Kroeger,
BSN, CNM, MPH with Linda J. Smith, BSE, FACCE, IBCLC. (Jones and Bartlett,
Pub.)
I also believe this bill is redundant. It is already against the law to
practice medicine without a license. Why do we need a separate law to
prevent people who are not doctors from practicing obstetrics? Midwives do
not ‘practice obstetrics’ they attend births. Most midwives don’t even claim
to deliver babies. The mothers deliver their own babies and the midwife is
in attendance.
Perhaps this bill is a restraint of trade issue. A consortium of medical
professionals is attempting to influence the law in order to increase their
market share. I do not believe this is how our legislative process should be
used.
Sincerely,
–Jody–
~Jody McLaughlin – Compleat Mother