Fox News: Government Report: U.S. Women Dying in Childbirth at the Highest Rate in Decades

Government Report: U.S. Women Dying in Childbirth at the Highest Rate in Decades

“U.S. women are dying from childbirth at the highest rate in decades, new government figures show. Though the risk of death is very small, experts believe increasing maternal obesity and a jump in Caesarean sections are partly to blame.

Some experts note that a change in how such deaths are reported also may be a factor.

“Those of us who look at this a lot say it’s probably a little bit of both,” said Dr. Jeffrey King, an obstetrician who led a recent New York state review of maternal deaths.

The U.S. maternal mortality rate rose to 13 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2004, according to statistics released this week by the National Center for Health Statistics.

The rate was 12 per 100,000 live births in 2003 — the first time the maternal death rate rose above 10 since 1977.

To be sure, death from childbirth remains fairly rare in the United States. The death of infants is much more common — the nation’s infant mortality rate was 679 per 100,000 live births in 2004.

Maternal deaths were a much more common tragedy long ago. Nearly one in every 100 live births resulted in a mother’s death as recently as 90 years ago.

Some health statisticians note the total number of maternal deaths — still fewer than 600 each year — is small. It is so small that 50 to 100 extra deaths could raise the rate, said Donna Hoyert, a health scientist with the National Center for Health Statistics.

In 2003, there was a change in death certificate questions in the nation’s most populous state, California, as well as Montana and Idaho. That may have resulted in more deaths being linked to childbirth — enough to push up the 2003 rate, Hoyert said.

Some researchers point to the rising C-section rate, now 29 percent of all births — far higher than what public health experts say is appropriate. Like other surgeries, Caesareans come with risks related to anesthesia, infections and blood clots.

“There’s an inherent risk to C-sections,” said Dr. Elliott Main, who co-chairs a panel reviewing obstetrics care in California. “As you do thousands and thousands of them, there’s going to be a price.”

Excessive bleeding is one of the leading causes of pregnancy-related death, and women with several previous C-sections are at especially high risk, according to a review of maternal deaths in New York. Blood vessel blockages and infections are among the other leading causes.

Experts also say obesity may be a factor. Heavier women are more prone to diabetes and other complications, and they may have excess tissue and larger babies that make a vaginal delivery more problematic. That can lead to more C-sections. “It becomes this sort of snowball effect,” said King.

The age of mothers could be a factor, too. More women are giving birth in their late 30s and 40s, when complications risks are greater.”

CDC final death report for 2004
A More in depth version of this same article at the Huffington Post: Go Here
Is anyone who has been following the childbirth scams of the past few years surprised by these statistics???
I’m not.
Jenny Hatch
People are talking about this article on the web:
Here are three conversations:
Digg
Mothering Magazine Discussion Forums
Denver Post
My Comment at the Post:
As a Bradley Childbirth Teacher and Mother of Five:
I have been watching the unfolding childbirth drama in America play out over the past 18 years.
It has been horrifying to watch so many gains from natural birth activism just melt away the past ten years as several different factors came into play. Soaring C-section and induction rates, increased drug use during pregnancy and labor, and systematic outlawing of home birth. This is a complex issue, but for me the bottom line questions are these:
With more mothers than ever getting prenatal care and more using allopathic (Drugs and surgery) infrastructure for birth, why is the maternal death rate going up? The preemie rate going up? The infant mortality rate going up? And why isn’t anyone in the press yelling about this travesty???
Articles like this do indeed link the c-section rate to the higher mother mortality rate. Yet, it feels like one big fat defense for Obstetricians.
The women are fat.
The women are old.
Lots of head scratching going on, “I dunno”.
Where are the real investigative journalists in our country, those who are willing to do an in depth story on Cytotec, a deadly drug used to induce labor??? The real story on Maternal Mortality and Morbidity??? The real story on the impact all of these drugs and surgery have on our children???
We are living in a land of Obstetric Terrorism and my message has been consistent to the mothers in my sphere of influence for the past ten years.
RUN FROM THE BIRTH MACHINE!
I’m tracking the debate on my blog: Go here to read the round up.
http://www.naturalfamilyblog.com/archives/cat_diy_homebirth_debate.html
I was not surprised by these numbers, and when the 2005, 2006, and 2007 numbers finally show up in a couple years, don’t be surprised to learn that EVERYTHING will have degraded even worse.
It is open season on Mothers in the delivery rooms of America.
Jenny Hatch, Birth Activist
WWW.NaturalFamilyBLOG.com
Louisville Colorado

NEWSMAX: Prenatal Antidepressants Linked to Preterm Births

Prenatal Antidepressants Linked to Preterm Births
I predict that the next study will connect Post Partum Psychosis to the use of prenatal anti-depressants.
Lung Disease in your newborn:
Deadly Newborn Disease Linked to Antidepressant Use During Pregnancy
Heart Disease and a host of other birth defects in your newborn:
Thanks Dr. Peter Breggin!!!
Pregnant Mothers Should Not Take SSRI Antidepressants

“On June 28, 2007 more than 250 headlines around the world promised that SSRI antidepressants (such as Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, and Celexa) are safe for pregnant mothers and their developing babies. “Mom’s Antidepressant Use Poses Little Danger to Baby,” heralded the Atlanta Journal Constitution. “Antidepressants pose low birth defect risk,” claimed Boston Globe. The New York Times ran with the Associated Press’s article titled “Antidepressants Not Big Risk for Defects.” The Wall Street Journal’s coverage was titled “Reassurance on Antidepressants in Pregnancy.” The day before the news stories broke, the Centers for Disease Control spun the news in advance with a press release headlined, “New Study Finds Few Risks of Birth Defects from Antidepressant Use During Pregnancy” (CDC Division of Media, 2007).

The headlines and the CDC press release were incredibly misleading. In the CDC study, several severe birth defects were doubled or nearly tripled in frequency when SSRIs were taken in the first trimester. This combined with the other known toxic effects of SSRIs, including brain damage and dysfunction, make these drugs contraindicated in pregnancy.

SSRI antidepressant use by pregnant mothers in the first trimester of pregnancy have been shown to have previously unidentified links to three birth defects in two new studies reported in the New England Journal of Medicine. One study was associated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (Alwan et al., 2007) and the other with Boston University (Louik et al., 2007).

The study led by Sura Alwan and colleagues involving the CDC showed the following: “Anencephaly–birth without a forebrain–showed a 2.4 times greater occurrence in women who had taken SSRIs in the first trimester.” This is a catastrophic, fatal birth defect that is not correctable.

The study examined histories of 9622 cases of birth defects and 4092 controls who were infants born without birth defects. Some stillbirths (occurring at 20+ weeks gestation) were included but if anencephaly resulted in a spontaneous miscarriage or a planned abortion, these events would not appear in this study’s findings.

Omphalocele–babies born with organs outside the body–was found to be present 2.8 times as often in the SSRI-treated mothers compared to the control group. Some media portrayed this birth defect as a small hernia of the umbilical cord–but severity of the condition varies, usually requires surgery as well as weeks to years of adapting, and can be life-threatening.

Craniosynostosis–the premature closing of one or more sutures or fibrous joints knitting the bones of the infant’s skull–showed 2.5 times more prevalence in infants exposed in utero to SSRIs. This condition also varies in severity. It can be primarily a bone condition of the skull or it can be secondary to an underdeveloped brain in the infant.

Craniosynostosis occurs in about four per 10,000 births according to the National Institutes of Health. A 2.8 times greater occurrence of this condition will cause 2,305 more U.S. babies to be born each year with this birth defect as a result of their mothers taking SSRIs in the first trimester of pregnancy.

In the abstract to the report, the CDC study claimed that it found no association between SSRI use in pregnancy and heart defects in neonates. However, that’s not true. The study found that obese women who did not use SSRIs had an increased risk with heart defects and that obese women who did use SSRIs had an even greater risk of neonatal heart defects with an adjusted odds ratio of 5.9 (95% CI, 2.4-14.3)!

The second study by Carol Louik and her colleagues did not find an overall correlation between SSRI use and the two defects, craniosynostosis and omphalocele. It did however find an association between sertraline (Zoloft) and both omphalocele and septal defects in the heart, and between paroxetine (Paxil) and right ventricular outflow tract obstruction defects of the heart.

Louik made many statements to the press reassuring people, in effect, not to worry. She made no mention of other birth defects and neonatal problems associated with SSRI antidepressants. Her study had funding from two pharmaceutical companies, including GlaxoSmithKline, the manufacturer of Paxil (Seward, 2007), one of the most implicated antidepressants in regard to birth defects. The company’s money was well spent. Thanks in part to Louik’s highly publicized comments, headlines throughout the country played down the risk.

Nor are these the only birth defects related to SSRI consumption during pregnancy. In December of 2005, the FDA issued a Public Health Advisory warning that the risk of congenital malformation, especially of the heart, was increased by the consumption of Paxil in the first trimester of pregnancy. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) (2006) warned pregnant women to avoid taking Paxil and also showed concern about any antidepressant exposure during pregnancy. Yet the CDC and researchers are using the new studies to exonerate SSRIs. This is clearly an orchestrated attempt to reassure the public after the FDA’s and ACOG’s earlier warnings.

The 2007 CDC study offers an illuminating discussion of other study findings concerning abnormal in utero development, including delayed ossification (bone development). “A specific role of serotonin in cardiac and craniofacial morphogenesis in the rodent embryo has also been established,” according to Alwan, et al. (2007) in the CDC study.

Newborns also go through withdrawal when their mothers have taken antidepressants during pregnancy. One study found a rate of 30% in neonates exposed in utero to SSRIs (Levinson-Castiel et al., 2006). Withdrawal symptoms in infants reported in various studies include irritability, high-pitched or weak crying, tremors, poor muscle tone, disturbed sleep, rapid breathing and respiratory distress, and increased admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit.

In addition, children exposed in utero to SSRIs have an increased risk of developing persistent pulmonary hypertension at birth. This disorder, which is estimated to occur in one or two infants for every 1000 live births, will occur six times more frequently in children exposed to SSRIs after the twentieth week of pregnancy. The disorder causes “significant morbidity and mortality” (Food and Drug Administration, 2006). These children have difficulty getting enough oxygen into their lungs. The two recent studies in the New England Journal of Medicine limited themselves to SSRI exposure during the first trimester; but the neonatal pulmonary hypertension studies show that some hazards will develop during exposure later in pregnancy. Again, the CDC and the researchers drew no attention to these hazards.

Withdrawal reactions confirm further potentially disastrous consequences of SSRIs to neonates that the CDC and the researchers failed to consider in their reassuring statements. Withdrawal reactions confirm that the brain of the fetus has been bathed in SSRIs and that is has suffered significant functional changes. It should be no surprise that it is not good to bath the growing brain in toxic drugs like SSRIs. Serotonin is intimately involved in the development of the brain in utero and SSRIs inhibit normal brain cell development (Norrholm and Ouimet, 2000). It is also known that SSRIs cause myriad toxic effects on neurons in living animals, causing brain cells to grow abnormally (Wegerer et al., 1999; Kalia et al., 2000). Unavoidably, similar effects must be taking place in the human fetus exposed to SSRIs. In addition, the SSRIs cause drastic biochemical imbalances in the brain, many of them persistent or permanent. At present we have no way of measuring the harmful impact on the growing brain and the future mind of the fetus; but exposure to SSRIs is bound to be harmful in the long run.

Also alarming is the Wall Street Journal report that antidepressant use during pregnancy has jumped from 5.7% in1999 to 13.4% in 2003 (Seward, 2007). The data was based on Medicaid patients and could be higher for the general population.

The reassuring attitude promoted in the CDC’s press release flew in the face of evidence linking SSRI exposure during pregnancy to increased birth defects, and the additional evidence of SSRI toxicity in the developing brain. It proclaimed that the study “found no significant increase in the risks for the majority of birth defects assessed…” But I’ve never heard of any prescribed drug that increases birth defects “for the majority of birth defects.” The assertion was sheer nonsense, carefully calculated to mislead and obfuscate.

Women and their doctors who only catch the headlines created by these studies are being grossly misled. SSRIs should never be used during pregnancy.

Drug advocates, including the CDC, justify the use of SSRIs during pregnancy on the basis that depression has its own hazards. But these hazards pale in comparison to the upheaval that will befall new mothers, fathers and the extended families of the children who are born with profound birth defects.

The worst hazards of depression in pregnancy are those of suicidality and, very rarely, infanticide. But the SSRIs are implicated in increasing the risks of both suicide and violence (Breggin, 2001, 2003; Breggin and Breggin, 1994). In fact, the new FDA labels for antidepressants specifically warn about SSRI-induced suicidality in youth and in young adults, the very group most likely to become pregnant (Food and Drug Administration, 2007). Now we know that the SSRIs not only threaten to cause the death of the mother through suicide but the death of the child as well through lethal birth defects.

The CDC and other pro-drug authorities urge pregnant mothers to speak with their doctors about the risk/benefit ratio of taking SSRI antidepressants. But doctors will have read the headlines inspired by the CDC, and imagine there is little risk. Furthermore, few physicians realize that meta-analyses have shown that antidepressants work no better than placebo at lifting depression (Kirsch et al., 2002; Moncrieff and Kirsch, 2005). The risk/benefit ration weighs a placebo effect against increased parental suicide and violence, and babies with congenital defects, babies undergoing withdrawal reactions, and babies whose brains have been forever changed by being soaked in SSRIs during their development.

There are many approaches to helping depressed people without resort to drugs (Breggin, 2001; Breggin and Breggin, 1994). Exercise has proven effective in alleviating depression. Therapy and counseling can also be very helpful, and in the case of pregnant women, family therapy involving the father of the child and other family members can be especially supportive. Pregnant mothers need to stay in touch with other mothers-to-be or to form an informal support group, and they need to plan ahead for as much emotional support as they can find for several months or more after giving birth. Anticipating help and support after the birth is one of the best antidotes to depression during the pregnancy.

Given the casual attitudes displayed by the researchers and most of the media, it’s appropriate to conclude with a condolence letter found on the website of the National Birth Defects Prevention Network (March of Dimes et al., 2006). The letter notes that there is no treatment for babies with anencephaly, that they will be lost early or late in pregnancy or die shortly after birth, a few days at the most. Addressed to parents who have a baby with anencephaly, the letter shows a heart-rending drawing of a flat-headed child with no forehead, and offers this emotional support:

We are so saddened to hear that your baby has anencephaly. We know this is not easy for you and you may not know how to feel. That’s okay. Parents of babies with anencephaly feel shock, denial, grief, and even anger. It is all right to feel this way and no one will blame you.

No one can or should blame the parents. But when the mother has been taking an SSRI antidepressant, increasing her risk by 240%, we must hold responsible the doctor who prescribed it, the drug company who manufactured and falsely promoted it, and the medical establishment that covers up and minimizes the drastic hazards associated with these toxic chemicals, including risks to adults, children and the unborn.”

Please, Please….if you are pregnant, take the time to carefully wean from your antidepressants and use natural remedies to deal with your depression. If you think you are depressed now, just wait until you have a permanently disabled child and realize that the cause of the disease is in fact your drug use! Don’t live this nightmare!
Every woman who is depressed has a B Vitamin deficiency. Please, take your vitamins (My favorite is Young Livings Super B) and eat fresh foods chock full of essential fatty acids (My favorites are flax seeds and fish) – whole grains eaten fresh ground every day will give you an abundance of b-vitamins, plus the nutrients you need to build a healthy child!
And EXERCISE!!!
And join a playgroup once a week for mothers of small children, or form one of your own, and hold on to your friends for dear life when the baby arrives!!!

Just say NO to drug use during pregnancy!

And would somebody in Government please dismantle the CDC and the FDA. They have absolutely no credibility and are just fronts for big pharma money and power.
Jenny Hatch

Womon and Sprout: Brewer Pregnancy Diet

Check out this blog entry from a blogger passionate about nutrition and healthy babies: Go Here
The comments are good too!
Jenny Hatch

The Hatch Family – Unassisted Homebirth for Husband and Wife!

The Paul Hatch Family: Do-it-Yourself Birthers!
This montage is a collection of photographs from the pregnancies and births of our five children.
Paul and I went from a very mainstream medically oriented couple to a Freebirthing Natural Family during the past nineteen years of our marriage. We promote Unassisted Lotus Birth as the most holistic and natural form of Childbirth available for families today.
And we give birth this way because we believe it is best for the BABY!
Jenny Hatch

Your Body Your Birth CD by Lynn Griesemer

PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT: Lynn M. Griesemer, greeze@juno.com
www.unassistedhomebirth.com
COUNTERCULTURAL! INSPIRATIONAL!!
FAIRFAX, VA —- July 31, 2007——Finally – a motivational childbirth CD for expectant mothers and women in the childbearing years! YOUR BODY, YOUR BIRTH: SECRETS FOR A SATISFYING AND SUCCESSFUL BIRTH may be one of the most valuable CDs a woman will own. Obstetricians and hospital personnel are primarily concerned with avoiding a crisis or medical problem, and often do not concern themselves with the personal and emotional aspects of childbirth. For many women, giving birth is one of the most important experiences they will have in their lives and having a satisfying birth is largely ignored by those in the baby business!
This 80-minute CD inspires, encourages and reveals secrets for a rewarding birth experience–one you will cherish for the rest of your life. If you’re pregnant or hoping to become pregnant, you can’t afford NOT to own this CD. To order your copy, visit http://www.unassistedhomebirth.com/YBYB.html (early August) or send a check for $14.95 plus $4.00 shipping to Terra Publishing, 4103 Plaza Lane, Fairfax, VA 22033 or order through Amazon.com beginning in September.)
“ In Your Body, Your Birth, Lynn Griesemer boldly yet gently encourages women to challenge their life-long beliefs and opinions about childbirth. She then beautifully weaves together her personal experiences, intuitive insights, and years of research to present a truly unique and empowering picture of childbirth. Every woman, regardless of where she plans to give birth, can find meaning and inspiration in Lynn’s words.”
Laura Shanley, Author, Boulder, CO
“Your Body, Your Birth, is a profoundly inspirational CD. Lynn, uses her wisdom and experience to craft a uniquely positive and provocative recording, perfect for first-time parents hesitant about facing the unknown path to childbirth.”
Augustine C. Daniels, Midwife, Bend, OR
“I have been listening to the CD and LOVE LOVE LOVE it. Superb reading and so nicely paced and pronounced – excellent material so well presented and clear.”
I listened to this CD recently and found it to be an excellet resource for the birthing mother who is getting ready to birth right now today. With up to date, timely information, this CD will help you to learn the right questions to ask first and foremost, yourself, your care giver, and will ultimately give you the tools you need to protect your body through childbirth.
Lynn Griesemer believes that we are at a crossroad with birthing practices. As we quickly approach the day when science blindly pushes all of us into surgery to give birth by cesarean, self actualized women are indeed pulling away from this madness and claiming the birth experience for themselves and their family.
Buy this CD today to help educate yourself with the facts!
Jenny Hatch