Gaskins' article is part of an appallingly cynical publicity ploy. Ms. Gaskin represents herself as shocked at the current rate of maternal mortality. As far as I can tell, Ms. Gaskin herself, and direct entry midwives in general have done NOTHING (no research, no education, no fund raising and no outreach to victims' families) to reduce the incidence of maternal mortality. Apparently, maternal mortality is not the real issue; criticizing obstetrics (inappropriately and unfairly) is the real issue.
If you visit Ms. Gaskin's Safe Motherhood website, which is supposedly devoted to maternal mortality, you will notice something rather curious. There is NO information about the causes, treatments and research into maternal mortality The site is exclusively devoted to criticisms of American obsterics ("Did you know…that the Centers for Disease Control estimated in 1998 that the US maternal death rate is actually 1.3 to three times that reported in vital statistics records because of underreporting of such deaths.").
Look at the page of "related articles". There are no scientific papers about maternal mortality. There is nothing about the epidemiology of maternal mortality. Twelve of thirteen articles are about medical mistakes. Gaskin wants to leave the impression that maternal mortality is caused by obstetric interventions. Indeed, in her public discussions, she is quite explicit. CafeMom reported:
"Most of these deaths are iatrogenic, Ina May explained. Iatrogenic means the treatment of the physician, the drugs administered and the surgeries performed harm rather than heal. The danger warned about in the Hippocratic Oath, which says "First Do No Harm," is as freshly applicable today as it was thousands of years ago.
In reality, as Gaskin almost surely knows, iatrogenic deaths represent a tiny fractions of maternal mortality. However, Gaskin doesn't mention the real causes, because that might require some action; the real causes include lack of health coverage, limited access to healthcare, racial inequalities, advanced maternal age and multiple pregnancies. Virtually every woman who succumbs to a pregnancy related illness or complication has one or more serious risk factors. Virtually none of these women could possibly be cared for by midwives. It is cynical in the extreme to exploit these personal tragedies simply to publicize homebirth midwifery.
Comment Reply
Gaskins' article is part of an appallingly cynical publicity ploy. Ms. Gaskin represents herself as shocked at the current rate of maternal mortality. As far as I can tell, Ms. Gaskin herself, and direct entry midwives in general have done NOTHING (no research, no education, no fund raising and no outreach to victims' families) to reduce the incidence of maternal mortality. Apparently, maternal mortality is not the real issue; criticizing obstetrics (inappropriately and unfairly) is the real issue.
If you visit Ms. Gaskin's Safe Motherhood website, which is supposedly devoted to maternal mortality, you will notice something rather curious. There is NO information about the causes, treatments and research into maternal mortality The site is exclusively devoted to criticisms of American obsterics ("Did you know…that the Centers for Disease Control estimated in 1998 that the US maternal death rate is actually 1.3 to three times that reported in vital statistics records because of underreporting of such deaths.").
Look at the page of "related articles". There are no scientific papers about maternal mortality. There is nothing about the epidemiology of maternal mortality. Twelve of thirteen articles are about medical mistakes. Gaskin wants to leave the impression that maternal mortality is caused by obstetric interventions. Indeed, in her public discussions, she is quite explicit. CafeMom reported:
"Most of these deaths are iatrogenic, Ina May explained. Iatrogenic means the treatment of the physician, the drugs administered and the surgeries performed harm rather than heal. The danger warned about in the Hippocratic Oath, which says "First Do No Harm," is as freshly applicable today as it was thousands of years ago.
In reality, as Gaskin almost surely knows, iatrogenic deaths represent a tiny fractions of maternal mortality. However, Gaskin doesn't mention the real causes, because that might require some action; the real causes include lack of health coverage, limited access to healthcare, racial inequalities, advanced maternal age and multiple pregnancies. Virtually every woman who succumbs to a pregnancy related illness or complication has one or more serious risk factors. Virtually none of these women could possibly be cared for by midwives. It is cynical in the extreme to exploit these personal tragedies simply to publicize homebirth midwifery.
Amy Tuteur, MD
July 15, 2008 - 5:33pmThis Comment
Reply