Birth Rights Rally in September: Who's Coming & Co-ordinators

[Smoke Jaguar]

Kitt3n, Country Fire Authority - they've got a team that works on volunteer benefits with businesses in the community, and there are some really good ones for us out there! And no worries about sharing - I should have clarified, I'm sharing with my GF and her 1yo DD Unless Bath wants to kip with us, in which case I'll upgrade my booking for a room with more beds!
Try the Zuji website for hotel/motel deals.

[Julie Doula]

My brother reckons he's coming too, wearning a t-shirt that says, "I'm only here to meet cute single mamas". I said that's OK as long as he holds up a sign saying "Every Woman, Every Choice". My mum (midwife for 30 yrs) is coming too!

[Julie Doula]

It seems to me that the home birth movement are absolutely sensationalising their campaign and putting around misinformation that home births will be 'illegal'. There is no proposal to outlaw home births under any law around the country.

As explained earlier, under the proposed legislation Midwives who attend home births will not be eligible for insurance. If they don't have insurance they won't be able to attend hospitals, use medicare benefits numbers etc.

I think the charge that the "homebirth movement" (whozzat??) are 'absolutely sensationalising their campaign' is not accurate.

Coroner Reimer is not a homebirther, but a person who had to rule on a very difficult case. I don't think his comments are born of any desire to sensationalise anything. But this is his perspective of the effect the legislation is likely to have:

Report from Coroner Reimer re. the case concerning midwife Jillian Delaile
June 2009
Research shows the rate of infant deaths for homebirth is the same or slightly less than the rate of infant deaths for similar low-risk women who plan hospital births.
This concerns the sad case of a baby who did die in the process of being born at home, despite the midwife's efforts to resuscitate and transfer the baby.
Coroner Reimer's comments in the opening paragraphs make some compelling points:
"At the outset, it should be noted that certain pronouncements of the Federal Government of late might have a vast effect on the viability of private practitioner midwives and indeed the future of the practice of homebirthing altogether.
It seems that it is intended to legislate to make it unlawful for homebirths to take place attended by midwives, unless they are fully covered for professional negligence. It has been forecast that no insurers will be prepared to issue such policies. It seems to follow that the practice itself, by this back-door method, could in itself become unlawful.
Obviously this could have disastrous ramifications. It might have the effect of driving the practice of homebirthing "underground", which would be a dangerous outcome. History has shown that there will always be a small group of expectant mothers (and fathers for that matter) who will want to give birth in their home.
The representatives of the parents in their submission (and indeed the mother in a separate letter to the Coroner), despite the disastrous experience of this birth, argue that it is the inherent right of a mother to determine how and where she should give birth and birthing at home should be an available option. Not suprisingly the midwife's representatives also press these sentiments on the Court. It is a practice that will not go away and it is to be hoped that the Legislators take great care in drafting any proposed laws in this regard."