There are no 100% guarantees with birth, it's true.

It is statistically safer to have a midwife there mainly because of the midwives training and equipment. There are scenarios which can be easily dealt with at home with no fuss (Post partum bleed, nuchal cord, slow to start bubs) provided there is someone there with the knowledge of what to do and the experience to do it, and the equipment they need to do so (in the expamples above sinctocin intermuscular injection (though a bite of the raw placenta can be a good alternative), untangling the cord/clamping and cutting before the body is born if it is preventing descent, bulb syringe for suctioning nose and throat and oxygen). The majority of births will not NEED that eqipment/help, but it is safer to have it there if it is needed.

I too know of as homebirth which went tragically wrong only a few weeks ago, but there is no real reason (beyond the natural tendency to think "if only" when something goes wrong) to think it would have been better in hospital and i know dozens of births which went well at home and would have been less positive in hospital - my own DD was shocked by the speed of labour and aspirated a little mec. Apgars were 9, 7, 10. The midwives suctioned her mouth and nose, put her naked on my naked belly and gave her a bit of oxygen from a tube i just held near her face. If we'd been in hospital she'd have spent her first night in SCBU having 2-hourly p rick tests for glucose etc. because of her rocky start. As it was she spent her first night wrapped against my chest feeding on and off and perfectly fine.

If it is any comfort, whatever birth you decide, whatever parenting decisions you make in fact, you will always find SOMEONE who thinks you're crazy and irresponsible.

Bx