A Sharon obstetrician yesterday filed suit against an Illinois blogger with whom she's been engaged in an increasingly nasty flamewar over home births.
In her suit, filed in US District Court in Boston, Dr. Amy Tuteur of the Skeptical OB, charges that Gina Crosley-Corcoran, who writes the Feminist Breeder, is abusing a federal online copyright law to try to shut her down.
Tuteur, a former professor at Harvard Medical School, says she uses her blog in part to wage war on proponents of home birthing:
Having seen thousands of births and the serious risks posed to both mother and baby, especially when such births are deliberately performed at home rather than a hospital, Dr. Amy writes for The Skeptical OB to "tell the truth about and expose the lies of self-proclaimed homebirth ‘midwives’, and to protect babies who don’t have to die."
That's drawn the ire of Crosley-Corcoran, who railed against Tuteur and who last month posted a selfie showing her giving Tuteur the finger.
When Tuteur posted a copy of the photo to slice into Crosley-Corcoran (photo since removed), she charges, Crosley-Corcoran sic'ed her lawyer on her, seeking money for using the photo and then, when that didn't work, began using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to get Tuteur's Web hosts to take her blog site down for allegedly violating her copyright by using a copy of the finger photo.
In a post in which she calls Tuteur a terrorist and compares her to the Westboro Baptist Church, Crosley-Corcoran writes:
She could owe me statutory damages, but because I'm a fair and reasonable human being, my attorney and I felt it was best to discuss a non-monetary settlement with Amy and her lawyer. I’m not looking to be greedy – I simply wanted a resolution. In exchange for me not pursuing the damages, we wanted Amy to agree to stop personally attacking me. It was that simple.
For any reasonable person, this settlement would have been a no-brainer. I was paying her an undeserved kindness by offering her the chance to simply stop badgering me in exchange for the great deal of money that a judge could make her pay me for trying to profit from my copyrighted work.
Then, Tuteur charges, "posts by Crosley-Corcoran on The Feminist Breeder's Facebook page reveal that Crosley-Corcoran has, upon information and belief, been working on a plan to interfere with Dr. Amy's relationship with her website host," by issuing bogus "takedown" claims under the DMCA.
Tuteur seeks an injunction against any lawsuit related to "the Finger Photograph," plus monetary damages.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 Tuteur complaint | 0 bytes |
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
I found this bit interesting
By SwirlyGrrl
Sat, 01/26/2013 - 11:59pm
She hasn't practiced or published in a while (she doesn't say exactly when she left or if she maintains her certifications). Might explain how she seems to be fighting battles from the past, and referring to home birth midwifes as having far less training and experience and supervision as many are legally required to - an not at all acknowledging the role that midwifes take in many hospital births. Not that Feminist Breeder isn't also arguing from talking points popular in the early 90s ... but the whole thing seems rather strangely dated (considering that my boys were born in the late 90s).
Many states prohibit anyone other than a CNM (certified nurse-midwife ... equivalent of a nurse-practitioner in education and training) from attending home births, and these must be supervised by an OB practice with emergency plans in place, including transport to hospital. MA is one of these states. Also, many hospital-based OB practices include CNMs to spend the needed time with patients, set up plans, do the screenings, and attend low risk births (all in hospital settings under supervision).
As a regular reader of Dr.
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 1:34am
As a regular reader of Dr. Amy she spends a lot of time explaining the difference between CNMs and DEMs. She worked with CNMs and respects them very much. As you say, CNMs work mostly in hospitals but some attend homebirths. I know Dr. Amy isn't a fan of homebirth but she does defend the right of women to have the choice. It's my opinion that if US midwives all had a CNM or equivalent ( in Europe there are non nurse midwives that have extensive university education in midwifery ) there wouldn't be such fuel for debate.
In my state, there are many
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 2:45am
In my state, there are many CNMs, but almost all of them practice in hospitals. It is hard to find a CNM who will do a homebirth. On the other hand, it is very easy to find a homebirth midwife who is NOT a CNM. My state allows anyone to practice as a midwife. I could be one. You could be one. After some horrible outcomes, a few politicians tried to tighten up the regulations to make things safer; they were accused of trying to deny women choice. To be fair, many states that really try to enforce medical training and accountability for birth attendants end up with underground midwives. Those are the ones who hide or take off before the paramedics show up, and ask their clients to pretend it was an unplanned out of hospital birth.
Wonder why CNMs don't do homebirths
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 10:31am
Do you think most CNMs don't do homebirths, just maybe, because they think homebirth is dangerous? Just maybe it was a professional decision made based on actual evidence that being out of reach of lifesaving equipment and specialists puts women and neonates at risk? No. It must be because they just don't understand how much you want it.
Other states take a very
By lydia91
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 7:36am
Other states take a very different view -- check out Oregon if you want to see what the wild, wild west of unregulated midwifery looks like.
These issues are STILL current. The Big Push for Midwives campaign is actively working to extend the ability of CPMS to practice in various states. Other pro-midwife groups are working to broaden insurance reimbursement for CPMs and the ability of CPMs to obtain Medicaid payments. Bills are still in front of various state legislatures dealing with the legality of midwifery practice. See, for example, the blog "Safer Midwifery for Michigan".
You do realize
By SwirlyGrrl
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 9:31am
That there are areas of Oregon that are so remote that the nearest hospital is 100 miles away.
When my father had a work accident, we drove 35 miles each way to the nearest hospital to visit him.
Not that many people live these places, but home birth is a possibly more attractive than driving to a motel a week before your due date and staying there until you go into labor.
Not that it is a good thing - but having areas that are 2x the size of MA and contain 15,000 people leads states to regulate some things differently at the edges. Such as with supported home schooling when school bus rides are more than two hours each way.
The flip side is also true
By Charlotte
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 10:10am
If someone is 100 miles from the hospital and decides to home birth because of it, it also means that the reasoning homebirthers use to claim it is safe ("I'm only x number of minutes from the hospital" "I can transfer if I need to" "I can use the hospital as back up") won't apply. If you have a postpartum hemorage, the baby gets stuck in the birth canal and you need an emergency c-section (happened to me!), you develop postpartum preeclampsia, or experience the countless other things that can go wrong with a birth, you and your baby will have no choice but to sit and die at home, because CPMs can do next to nothing to save you. A few states allow them to carry pitocin to combat a very minor hemorage and most know some basic things like CPR, but you are really up a creek if you decide to home birth in a rural area.
If you are very far from the hospital, you don't have to pretend that's an excuse to home birth. You can leave for the hospital early in labor (you will have time - hospitals will turn you away and tell you to come back later if you show up in the first 3-4 hours, so even faraway women will arrive without having missed anything), or you could call an ambulance to rush you to the hospital if you suspect the baby will come fast. Both are options rural women use every day. There is no home birth/motel room dichotomy where you have to choose one or the other.
"When my father had a work
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 3:09pm
"When my father had a work accident, we drove 35 miles each way to the nearest hospital to visit him."
Why didn't you just use a local healer? Slap some herbs on there and tell him to breath through the pain?
You really don't read well
By SwirlyGrrl
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 3:46pm
Do you?
We did have visiting nurses when more urban people would have had a stay in a rehabilitation unit.
http://oregonmidwifeinfo.com/
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 5:00pm
http://oregonmidwifeinfo.com/midwives/
Demonstrably not true!
By MA Mom
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 9:49pm
She left practicing medicine in 2003. It's all over the place on her blog and elsewhere. Just because her book was published in the early 1990s, it doesn't mean that's the last time she worked.
And you're dead wrong about home birth in Massachusetts. In most states, including this one, direct-entry midwifery operates completely outside the scope of the law. CNMs-- certified nurse midwives, NOT direct-entry midwives-- in most states are the ones who are prohibited from attending home birth at all, or who are allowed to attend home birth only with a cooperating/supervising OB and a hospital backup plan. Because of this restriction, there are very few CNMs who attend home births. The vast majority of home births in the US are attended by direct-entry midwives, who may or may not carry the CPM-- certified professional midwife-- credential. All you need to do is Google "CPMs Massachusetts" to get a long list of local homebirth midwives, none of whom have a nursing license.
You claim to be a practicing epidemiologist, and maybe you are, but you seem really, really uninformed about even basic terminology with regard to current birth practices.
Actually, no
By MA Mom
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 10:37pm
MA is NOT one of those states. Massachusetts requires all CNMs to work under the supervision/cooperation of an OB, none of whom will agree to work with a homebirth midwife. As a result, CNMs in Massachusetts do not attend home births at all. ALL of them work in hospital settings.
Massachusetts, though, DOES have a large number of non-nurse direct-entry midwives (DEMs/lay midwives/CPMs) who attend nothing but home births. This isn't strictly against the law; rather, these midwives practice completely outside any legal oversight. Their services aren't covered by insurance, and there are no OBs working with them.
I'm a little surprised that someone who claims to be a practicing epidemiologist doesn't know even these basics about the circumstances surrounding birth attendants in MA. Dr. Amy, for example, repeatedly makes clear the differences between the types of midwives attending births at home and in the hospital.
Similarly, it doesn't take a lot of digging to find out that Dr. Amy was practicing until 2003, when she retired and let her license lapse. Just because her book was published in 1994 doesn't mean that's when she stopped practicing.
Am I the only one...
By jodienotloggedin
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 12:13am
... who kind of hopes the judge tells them both to shut up and get off the internet?
If I could + that comment
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 12:31am
If I could + that comment twice, I would!
I home-birthed a Lincoln-log once
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 3:57am
Having casually read into this matter a bit, and having read it from reputable sources (medical professionals), I'm at a loss with regard to understanding the militant home-birth movement.
If you are willing to risk giving a home-birth for shits and giggles without an ambulance standing by in your driveway, you are gambling your child's future. Complications during birth can cause crippling damage to the child in a matter of minutes, and having the midwife call 911 when shit hits the fan still sets you up for a good 15 minute ambulance response time at best, then intake, diagnosis, then intervention lasting another half hour.
How do you explain to your brain-damaged child that they're not what they could have been because you wanted the right kind of scented candle burning during their birth. This is some serious stupid shit.
Okay then
By SwirlyGrrl
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 9:19am
How do you explain, given the rareness of homebirth in the US (<1% of births, excluding the OMG BABY'S HEAD!!!! surprises), the lagging fetal and maternal morbidity and mortality outcomes compared to other developed countries?
How do you explain this in terms of home birth, despite much higher prevalence of midwifery and home birth (and, now, some indication that outcomes might be improved with clinic births) in other developed countries.
Also, are you aware of the rates of hospital acquired infections for women and neonates in US hospital settings? The kind of damage those can cause - including death and brain damage to infants? Infection rates as high as 30% in women who deliver by c-section, which can be as much as 1/3 of births in some areas?
Railing against home birth is a distraction from some seriously larger issues of maternal, fetal, and neonatal treatment in the US.
How do you explain how home
By Charlotte
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 10:28am
How do you explain how home birth, which has a dramticaly higher maternal and neonatal death rate than hospital birth, could possibly do anything to lower mortality and morbidity rate? Please read my explanation above about how infant mortality and perinatal mortality are two very different things, and how the fact that US has among the lowest perinatal mortality rates in the world means moms and babies are safer delivering here than nearly anywhere else, especially countries like the Netherlands where home birth is common. Did you know that in recent years home birth rates have fallen there in response to reports about how a low-risk woman delivering at home with a midwife is more likely to die or have her baby die than a high-risk woman delivering in a hospital with an MD? They were mistaken about the risks of home birth for many years, and you may be too.
If lowering rates of c-sections and maternal infections is your goal, there are effective ways to do that that don't involve home birth. My obstetrician has a success rate of 96% for women hoping to deliver vaginally. He does it by doing things like allowing moms ample time to deliver (36+ hours if baby is okay), encouraging letting labor start naturally, gently augmenting stalled labor, etc. We don't need home birth to fix the problems with birth in the US.
You stated earlier that you
By spinster
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 11:04am
You stated earlier that you were too busy to read the research...are you just too busy to read research that contradicts what you want to believe?
Regarding infections in hospitals...hospitals haven't been dirty places for a good 100 years now. Not since the germ theory took root and doctors/nurses started washing their hands and disinfecting. There is no way a hospital is dirtier than the average household, especially one with pets or kids. And I've seen more than one homebirth on youtube where they gave birth in the bathroom or on the toilet. That's cleanliness?!
Also, you must not have heard of the woman in North Carolina or somewhere who acquired necrotizing fasciitis in her vagina after her homebirth midwife checked her without gloves on.
Was this the woman who got
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 12:50pm
Was this the woman who got accused of infecting the poor midwife by the midwife's supporters? Oh the poor gloveless midwife...
You have reached a nonsensical point
By SwirlyGrrl
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 3:54pm
Please do a google search and try again.
Hospital acquired infections are a serious issue in maternal and neonatal health - and for non obstetric hospital stays as well.
If you believe what you wrote, you need to familiarize yourself with modern information of such bugs as c. diff. and others that are 1)antibiotic resistant and 2) nearly impossible to remove from a hospital environment and 3) cause substantial morbidity and mortality from hospital acquired infections.
Sorry, but I do have a PhD in epidemiology and while I didn't read past a SINGLE specific article abstract (since I'm not at work and hit the paywall) doesn't mean that I'm not familiar with the larger issues here as somebody who has aggregated birth outcome data from an international consortium of scientists and authored papers on birth outcomes research. You are welcome to use the internet yourself - there is much in Pub Med on the subject that is available on the public side of the paywalls. Google "Pub Med" to get to the keyword portal. I shouldn't have to catch you up on such basic research.
Otherwise, if as many as 1 in 9 mothers coming home with a potentially life threatening infection requiring treatment sounds fine to you, by all means carry on your anti-homebirth arguments as though they even mattered in the larger scheme of neonatal and maternal health.
In any case, I haven't once argued that unregulated home birth is a good thing - what I have been arguing here is that this crusade against home birth in the US is a complete distraction from the overall situation of relatively negative morbidity and mortality outcome statistics for the entire system of obstetrical care in the US.
I'm sorry if you can't wrap your dichotomous minds around anything that isn't in one bin or the other, isn't "with us or against us!!!" or isn't some sensational and singular horror story. It is entirley possible to criticize the "Skeptical OB/GYN" for her misplaced fervor and point out that the US has overall lousy outcomes despite high hospitalization rates that could use some critical scrutiny without being a "homebirth advocate" or whatever strange things you choose to project upon me this time. You just make yourself look foolish by engaging in such reactionary projections, however.
Of course hospitals have
By Charlotte
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 3:54pm
Of course hospitals have germs. But here's the thing - despite the germs, a mother delivering her baby in the hospital is still dramatically safer than one delivering at home. I would be so bold as to claim that it's you who is trying to distract from the real issues with talks of germs. The real issue is that there are people out there like Gina who are encouraging women to choose a far deadlier option when a much safer one is easily available to all American women. They try to create a smokescreen and the illusion of a grey area by talking about infections and trying to claim that statistics say what they really don't, or citing out-of-context or irrelevant information. They try to make it seem as if the question of the safety of home birth is still undecided when in fact it is very settled. If you give birth at home, you and your baby are much more likely to die or suffer injury. Period. If they really cared about maternal and neonatal mortality, they would not support home birth.
Try again...
By HomebirthsInjur...
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 4:16pm
The CDC says that 1 in 20 patients will get a hospital acquired infection (HAI). You're claiming the rate is more than double for pregnant women. Of course, midwives don't really have a requirement to report such things.
Also, if you read TFB loon you'll see she attended a birth with a hacking couch! How awesome that a wack-a-doodle like TFB has NO oversight and can endanger a mother and newborn as she did.
Yes, and her daughter was
By Tara D
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 12:40pm
Yes, and her daughter was being tested for pertussis. That's really safe for a newborn. Tell me again how birth junkies just wanna help people?
No paywalls here, but you
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 5:12pm
No paywalls here, but you might have to revise your view of whether the U.S. really does have lousy outcomes and whether her fervor is really misplaced.
http://www.skepticalob.com/2012/03/international-c...
http://www.skepticalob.com/2011/08/infant-mortalit...
http://www.skepticalob.com/2011/07/dutch-homebirth...
http://www.skepticalob.com/2011/09/us-newborn-deat...
She's not an epidemiolgist
By SwirlyGrrl
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 5:59pm
She is also not a doctor anymore.
Neither would be an issue if she bothered to submit her research and findings to peer-reviewed journals.
She doesn't do that.
Neither would be an issue if she remained affiliated with a university as an adjunct researcher and maintained contact with other reseachers and colleagues.
She doesn't appear to do that, either (and, I might add, I know a number of professors and doctors who have chosen that route to stay current while they raise families and homeschool their kids and the like).
She is welcome to blog her opinions. I don't accept them as scientific given the lack of peer review that encourages academic rigor.
And you are not an OB
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 6:22pm
And you were never an OB to start with.
I'd take a retired OB's opinion on childbirth over the opinion of an epidemiologist any day of the week. Infections aren't the only dangers in childbirth.
Dr Amy might not come off as an overly nice person. But she is certainly more qualified to talk about obstetrics than you or I. And she's more qualified to talk about obstetrics than Gina. I don't see you talking about Gina's opinions on her blog?
Where are you getting all
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 6:43pm
Where are you getting all these peer reviewed pro home birth articles put out about US midwives? Sorry, your bullshit is showing. You would rather believe what a bunch of people who were never doctors has to say than what someone who actually practiced medicine has to say. The fact that everything she says is reflective of what anyone that knows ANYTHING about the subject should alleviate whatever anxieties you have about her not being a 'practicing' doctor. Add to it the only people claiming all the garbage you've posted here have no kind of relevant education, university affiliation, etc and it becomes crystal clear that 'qualifications' are the last thing you are really worried about. You are such an epic lay person that not only do you confuse original research that requires peer review with commentary on research that is ALREADY peer reviewed, but you can't refute anything she says so you attempt to cast doubt on its validity by attacking her qualifications. Fail.
Excuse me?
By SwirlyGrrl
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 7:23pm
Your failure to transcend dichotomous thinking is showing.
I'm not a homebirth advocate. I'm just daring to question this doctor's failure to submit her findings to peer-reviewed journals when she seems happy to disseminate them in the popular press where they won't be questioned ... because they should be questioned if they are to be given the mantle of scientific validity. As should any scientific findings, assertions, etc.
Are you that unable to process a world that isn't us vs. them? That it is possible to call BS on unsupported and unchallenged opinions on both sides of an issue?
Oh, and I'm not an "epic lay person". I get to put Dr. in front of my name, too.
Nothing you have said on this
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 7:54pm
Nothing you have said on this topic is remotely informed, as has been demonstrated by numerous people. You write as if Dr Amy is the only person that says these things. What planet are you on, and for gods sake what kind of doctor are you? Everything you have posted is trumpeted by home birth supporters, I apologize for assuming you support something you are vigorously defending....What kind of doctor doesn't grasp that commentary on studies doesn't need to be peer reviewed? She isnt conducting studies, so why would you be questioning her for not submitting anything to be peer reviewed?? She writes commentary on peer reviewed studies. Why is that so hard to grasp? Everything Dr Amy posts is accepted as medical fact in the medical community, she isn't going out on some weird limb where the burden of proof is resting on her shoulders. It rests on the shoulders of home birth advocates that claim home birth is safe, despite nearly all studies showing at least 3x the death rate. You say you aren't a lay person...yet you seem not to have even the foggiest grasp of US maternity care stats, the literature you randomly quote, or even what is subject to peer review and what isn't....and you still haven't refuted a single thing she's said. Raise questions about Dr Amy by refuting what she says, not by some faux concern over peer review and her not currently practicing. Arguments based on logical fallacies might fly over on the feminist breeder, but you'll need to come up with something of better substance when addressing people that actually know what they are talking about.
Do you even understand what a
By Charlotte
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 8:01pm
Do you even understand what a research journal is? Do you know what peer reviewed means? Do you know what a blog post is?
I am absolutely stunned that you insist that Dr. Amy must be a currently practicing doctor, a professor, or a full or part-time researcher to be able to read a peer reviewed journal write a blog post about it, and must then submit her writings for peer review before posting on a blog in order to have credibility. I am not joking. I am seriously floored that you continue to say that.
I am going to tell you how all of this works, not to try and be a snarky internet commentor, but because it really and truly sounds like you do not know how this all happens.
First, researchers decide that there is a question they need to answer and put forth a proposal to whatever group they are associated with (university, corperation, government, etc.) Once the proposal is accepted, they gather test subjects and perform their research. Afterwards, they gather all the data, analyze it, and come to a conclusion. They then submit their data to a peer-reviewed journal so other researchers can learn from their findings, as well as critique their methods and conclusions and consider it for publication in the journal. They can also choose to try and replicate the outcome in a study of their own.
This is the part where Dr. Amy and anyone else who is interested in the data can come in. Anyone, and I mean anyone, from a high school student to a doctor to a newspaper reporter to a government policy expert can come, view the data, and talk about them. I myself sorted through many peer-reviewed journals in high school and college and wrote hundreds of pages based on that data just like Dr. Amy does. I did not have to submit my essays for peer review any more than Dr. Amy has to submit her blog posts. The peer review part is already done! If she tried to submit a blog post or a Facebook blurb people would scratch their heads and laugh!
And anyway, does it help that the text of the lawsuit says that Dr. Amy is not only a Harvard-trained doctor when practiced for at least a decade, but was also at some point an instructor there? I honestly can't think of anyone more qualified to speak about topics in obstetrics. If Dr. Amy doesn't make the cut for you, no one will - least of all Gina.
I don't care how many Drs you
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 8:09pm
I don't care how many Drs you put in front of your name, you seem unable to grasp a simple concept: some people write for peers and other write for lay people. Dr Tuteur never claimed to have any "findings", got it? Researchers write for peers and then journalists present or mispresent their findings. Dr Tuteur continues to do what she did when she was practicing - she explains obstetrics to mothers who are, presumably, lay people. While the peer-reviewed research you are whining for is making its way through the routines, babies are dying and that makes Dr Tuteur mad.
Do you realize how pseudo-elitistic you sound? So what, we lay people are not entitled to having things explained as the one doing the explanation thinks they are? Explanations are reserved for peers alone! And you have the nerve to accuse Dr Tuteur of looking down on non-doctors? Irony, thy name is Dr Epidemiologist.
When worlds collide
By adamg
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 9:59pm
We seem to have two groups of people in this discussion: People who are seriously invested in the Dr. Amy/Gina war, who have been following it for weeks, if not months and who have irrevocably chosen a side - and Universal Hub regulars, who likely had never heard of either person until I posted about the lawsuit.
I'm in the latter camp; I'd never heard of these two bloggers until I read the lawsuit complaint. And I admit: I'm going to take the word of an active epidemiologist on issues of disease spread in 2013 over somebody else's, including an obstetrician who has not actively practiced for some time. That doesn't mean I think Tuteur doesn't have valid points about birthing babies, but there is more to medical practice these days in a world with nosocomial infections and bacteria resistant to all available antibiotics.
I follow
By Meagan
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 10:45pm
I follow Amy's blog, though I'm not a hardcore "follower." I would like to point out that Amy never claimed that infections don't occur in childbirth. The point where I disagree the above commenter who claims to be an epidemiologist (I don't disbelieve her, but, you know, it's the Internet so I don't automatically believe her either) is that Amy is not actually producing research that needs to be peer reviewed... She's just blogging. Generally about OTHER people's research.
Err, we're talking about
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 4:50am
Err, we're talking about childbirth, not medicine in general, right? Mind you, the epidemiologist here was telling things like "homebirth is prevalent in Netherlands!" and "Netherlands is faring better in the terms of outcomes". Both statements are, in the best case scenario, really uninformed and in the worst case, outright lies.
Still sure you believe her?
Correction: we are talking
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 4:57am
Correction: we are talking about childbirth, not medicine in general. Lots of good it'll do to me to escape a hospital acquired infection and instead have my baby's cord prolapse in my living room. It'll be absolutely worth it!
That means you have made up
By Charlotte
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 6:27am
That means you have made up your mind and taken a side as well, within minutes of hearing about this, and after reading next to nothing about the subject. You have very unwisely decided to instantly and unquestioningly believe someone claiming to be an epidimeologist even though the posters here have proven how very little this person knows on the subject and is making wildly untrue claims.
You don't know anything about me, or her
By adamg
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 7:24am
I've run this site for, gosh, six or seven years now, and Swirly has been an active participant for most of that time. She really is what she says she is, which obviously you're free to not believe, since you don't know me from, well, me, there's not much I can do about that.
You're right - I don't know much about the home birthing controversy - but I'm not going to automatically discount the word of somebody I've known for quite some time on the sayso of anonymous commenters.
you don't know anything about me, or her.
By r
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 8:16am
"since you don't know me from, well, me..."
Nice one!
Well, we are not talking
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 8:38am
Well, we are not talking about smallpox here, we're talking about PPH that can kill a woman in 8 minutes (almost happened to my mother). It seems you've decided to take the word of someone who is not an expert over the word of someone who went through residency, practiced and has a book on childbirth published, so don't start about anonymous commenters. Any retired OB has forgotten more about obstetrics than any epidemiologist can ever hope to learn and vice versa. I really don't understand that line of reasoning - I'll take Swirly's word on something she's not an expert in and I won't do even a basic Google search to see that her main claims are false.
Correction: the 8 minutes was
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 9:40am
Correction: the 8 minutes was hearsay, something I heard from my gyn. I didn't think to ask where he knew it from. Still, the point stands: PPH can kill a woman in minutes. Presumably, the same minutes that are needed to transport her to the hospital after her lovely homebirth turns into a nightmare.
The point is PPH can kill a
By florence
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 9:59am
The point is PPH can kill a mother faster than she can get into a hospital( and that is even if she lives really close to it) the average transfer time in the US is about 40 min, from initial decision til the mom is seen by an OB. HB is great and a perfect choice in hindsight, since there is no way to know for sure ou won't need life saving intervention HB IS a risky choice,even for low risk moms...
Please Contact a Local OB-GYN and Ask
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 7:51pm
Since you are running this site in a semi-journalistic capacity, I think you should contact a university medical school affiliated OB and ask them about homebirth.
Then you will understand why swirly is incorrect.
Thanks Adam
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 2:00pm
Something to think about is this. I would never deny the reality have of hospital acquired infections. However, when it comes to maternal or neonatal infections the VAST majority have nothing to do with acquiring them from the hospital. And one thing Dr. Amy has highlighted is that the most common neonatal infection, Group B strep, is often mistreated or not treated at home. There are midwives out there telling women to use garlic or chlorhexidine douches instead of antibiotics. There are midwives out there discouraging testing for this bacteria or treating for it at all. There are midwives out there denying the role prolonged ruptured membranes has in perinatal infection. The epidimiologist is using a bait and switch. Yes, there are rare instances where a mother or baby might acquired an infection in the hospital they would not have acquired at home. There is never any excuse for that. But the statistics still don't support the premise that a baby is safer being born at home over a hospital. In my view, bringing up hospital acquired infections is an attempt to hide the real issues in the debate.
What Findings?
By Meagan
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 10:38pm
But she doesn't blog about her "findings." She reviews and explains other people's research, interspersed with scathing opinion pieces. There's nothing she SHOULD submit to peer review, she's just making other people's data more available and understandable, talking about possible flaws (including flaws of anti-homebirth research) and conclusions.
Really Swirygirl???
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 10:29pm
Swirlygirl, you obviously don't read Dr Amy's blog. You want her opinions or research to get into peer reviewed journals? Dr Amy discusses published articles from peer reviewed journals that she bases her opinions on! Don't you get that. She discusses articles from BMJ, NEJM, OB/GYN green and gray journal. She discusses CDC and state reporting agencies statistics. Articles from New Zealand and elsewhere. Dr Amy doesn't have to get anything published, she is educating you about what is published. I have read your comments on here, you are obviously biased towards homebirth, good luck with that. I am an OB/GYN still practicing and I agree with most of Dr Amy. Just because she is retired doesn't make her forget medicine or statistics or journal review. Her reviews of articles and state homebirth statistics are all contemporary and often even before being officially published. She doesn't quote old articles or compare to old statistics like pro homebirth studies like Johnson & Davies does.
I suggest you go there and read some more before you pass your ignorant opinions. What peer review journals to your opinions appear in?
If you are working in the
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 2:09am
If you are working in the public health field, you might know some medical doctors. Ask any of them if they would stop being doctors if they stopped practicing and gave up their license. The answer, of course, is no. You earn the doctorate and the title "Dr." when you graduate medical school - even before your residency, even before your fellowship, even before you pass a licensing exam, even before you practice. You have it whether or not you ever go on to get your license and whether or not you give that license up.
If you have time to actually click the links I posted, you'll be able to see that she is not reporting on her own research. She is reporting, in some detail, on the published and peer reviewed research of others. If you have time to click on those links, you may discover that this is an area of public health that you can learn more about.
she never claimed to do research
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 1:32pm
I am not sure why you keep talking about her research. She blogs about others research. She recently posted about how important it is to read a paper in it's entirety and not just the conclusion. She always links to the research she is talking about and she would be the first person to criticize someone for just taking someone's opinion about what a study says, including hers, as valid without looking at the study itself.
Ha, ha, ha...really?
By anon73
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 8:23pm
Guess what, the great thing about science is that it's NOT dependent on anyone's opinion. Dr. Amy is not claiming to "do research", she's presenting the known research that shows how dangerous homebirth is. I don't know why you think someone with an MD, who practiced as an OB/Gyn isn't "qualified" to read and understand the literature.
Besides, it doesn't take any advanced degrees to understand that the rates of injury and death during homebirth far, far exceeds the rate found in hospitals. Anyone who advocates for homebirth is absolutely advocating for babies to die.
Not science
By anon
Tue, 01/29/2013 - 11:41am
You can't pick and choose which evidence agrees with you, and then go on pogroms against the people whose research doesn't agree with you.
That shit got her booted off of science-based medicine:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/dr-t...
That, and she's neither a physician nor a scientist. Couldn't even fit in with the crowd that is dedicated to looking at the science of medicine? That doesn't concern you?
Don't expect to see her on an IOM panel anytime soon. She has a poor reputation as being both bullying and yet not the least bit rigorous among her colleagues. But she has minions who lack fundamental understanding of how science is made into policy and practice. Lovely.
Labor & Delivery unit is separated = no germs from sick people
By anon-GoCavs
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 5:55pm
L&D units are in a different part of a hospital...always. They even have a separate HVAC system. Therefore, the germs and strep and flesh-eating bacteria that you are worried about cannot enter the L&D building. It seems as if smarter people than us thought about that.
Um, okay
By SwirlyGrrl
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 6:30pm
Because laboring and delivering mothers never have any of those "sick people" germs themselves. No TB, no HIV, no C.Diff., no strep, no staph ... and they never pass stool while in labor all over the room or bleed or even exhale.
Right.
This is an old article, but demonstrative of how such measures don't "fix" the nosocomal transmission problem because a lot of us are walking around with this stuff on and in our bodies:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7559940
Aside from that study being
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 9:53pm
Aside from that study being too small to show anything worthwhile, it points out that 42% of the babies that tested positive were born with complications. I wonder how those babies would fare at home birth? What exactly do you think this study shows, and better yet, where is a study that compares home birth babies to hospital babies? What group of doctors, researchers, or other interested parties (march of dimes, American academy of pediatrics, etc) is indicating that the risks of infection in hospital outweigh risks of birthing elsewhere?
Exactly Swirlygirl, so if
By anon
Tue, 01/29/2013 - 6:01pm
Exactly Swirlygirl, so if some women have MRSA or VRE colonized on their bodies already and they decide to have a homebirth, are not they at the same risk as hospital nosocomial infections?
How do you explain, given the
By MA Mom
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 10:57pm
Off the top of my head.....
-We don't have universal single-payer health care, which affects the other factors listed below
-We have great income disparity in this country; poorer women have less access to good treatment over the course of their pregnancies
-We have higher obesity rates
You're an epidemiologist? Surely you have heard of coufounding factors and the principle that correlation does not imply causation?
You're also not being specific. Which outcomes? Lower cesarean rates, even though the WHO retracted their recommended 10-15% and admitted it wasn't backed by evidence? And which other developed countries? Some have higher rates of home birth, some don't. Most other western industrialized developed nations are located in western Europe, which is far more densely settled, implying that that more women live closer to a hospital. Further midwives in these countries have education and training more on par with what American CNMs have. The midwives that attend home births in the US wouldn't be allowed to practice in France or the Netherlands.
Of course those are important issues. But you're leaving out a few important numbers. How many deaths and instances of brain damage are cause each year by hospital-acquired infections? Is that number higher or lower than the number of deaths and instances of brain damage among home births. More importantly, is that RATE higher or lower? "Can be as high as....in some places" is not universal, for starters, and an "infection" can encompass everything from a minor rash that resolves on its own to NEC or MRSA. Without specifics, it's just a rhetorical device.
I'm not a cheerleader for Dr. Amy-- I'm pretty earthy-crunchy myself. But from my years associating with other natural-minded moms in LLL and similar groups, my experience has been that while Dr. Amy does cherry-pick when criticizing the excesses of the natural parenting community, the fact is those women exist and are a vocal and not-very-nice presence on and offline, and they DO drown out dissenters, and they DO encourage dangerous practices like home and unassisted VBACs and breech births.
Finally, you're complaining that Dr. Amy isn't focusing on more important issues. But neither are you-- instead, you're spending time on a comments thread criticizing her.
I don't doubt her qualifications as an OB
By swirlygrrl at work
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 9:29am
I'm sure she's quite good on the sort of "why do I have to have a c-section for placenta previa" sorts of issues.
However, she is passing herself off as a scientific expert to both the domestic and foreign press when she 1) has no affiliations, 2) no collaborators, and 3)hasn't published anything in the peer reviewed literature.
She is trying to advocate for policy in other countries, yet she misrepresents the research that is out there (according to her peers - read the earlier link) and has not subjected her opinions to the rigors of peer review.
That's like a US truck driver giving authoritative interviews on roadway design policies in UK and Europe.
If she is SO SURE of her beliefs, then why doesn't she approach colleagues, set up an HMS or HSPH adjunct appointment, and publish a collaborative, peer-reviewed research synthesis in the medical literature using transparent methodologies? Then I will be willing to listen to what she has to say (beyond her experience as an actual physician) because I could take it apart and reassemble it for myself.
However, that would mean criticism. That would mean compromise. That would mean systematic assessment that might not jibe with what she "just knows". That might actually lead her to change her mind or temper her statements. Also, "because I said so and I'm the doctor" doesn't work when you are with a panel of other doctors looking at all the evidence. Moving the goal posts and saying "well, these statistics don't say what I want so I'm going to say that these statistics aren't the ones that you should look at" isn't acceptable in such settings, either. I've seen people try this in such groups, and they get called out to support what they are saying. That's why peer review is so damn important.
This is the way science is done internationally. Tuteur, however, has decided not to subject her work and opinions to the kind of scrutiny of her peers that good science demands. That's why I think she is a crank - a more educated and informed crank than her fellow mommyblogger, perhaps. But certainly the sort of "lone scientist" or "lone doctor" on a mission who occasionally try to worm their way into review panels or spam our e-mails with threats and get turned away because they are doing advocacy, not science. Until and unless she exhibits proper research discipline and submits her personal findings to critical review, her injection of herself into the public health debate of countries who are actually grappling with issues of utilization and outcomes is, quite frankly, appalling and dangerous.
Hi Swirlygrrl, I've been
By Doula Dani
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 11:14am
Hi Swirlygrrl,
I've been reading your comments (well, all of the comments, actually). You are very stuck on why Dr Amy doesn't publish anything she writes. Have you read her blog? Can you give specific examples of blog entries that would be fit for a peer reviewed journal? I'm just confused as to what you are referring that is not valid b/c it has not been peer reviewed.
It also seems that you won't consider ANYTHING she has to say b/c it has not been peer reviewed. What about posts like this: http://www.skepticalob.com/2011/06/electronic-feta...
It has not been peer reviewed so does that make it irrelevant?
What about this one? http://www.skepticalob.com/2013/01/new-cdc-statist...
This is data from the CDC. Anyone can access the data. What would need to be peer reviewed for this blog entry to be considered relevant?
Or what about the countless home birth deaths she has brought up that are stories from mothers about the loss of their babies at a home birth? What about the stories she has found in the news?
I guess I'm just really confused about what needs to be peer reviewed.
Are you sure you are not a home birth advocate? Do you have any personal ties? Is it just something you enjoy reading about? I can't imagine any of my friends or family that have zero interest in home birth would know about any of the studies you have referenced or points you have made. It truly does seem you have some sort of vested interest.
Professor Jan van Lith of
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 11:14am
Professor Jan van Lith of Leiden University's teaching hospital told the paper media reports about the high perinatal death rate in the Netherlands were driving women to chose hospital births. The increase in demand for pain relief is also playing a role, he said.
http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2011/07/insu...
A Dutch professor in a teaching hospital says that their perinatal mortality is high and that women choose hospital births. Swirly says homebirth is a preferred choice in Netherlands and that their outcomes are vastly better. I know who I'd rather believe.
Again, not Dr Tuteur. A Dutch professor.
And Dr Tuteur's point is that women who think that popping a cinnamon candy and blowing at a woman with PPH (I kid you not, this was in Facebook where midwives were collecting tips for Midwifery Today) are not reliable providers and therefore delivering with them cannot be safe. I agree.
Still, it seems we've moved the debate 'Homebirth vs Hospital" here. The post was originally about Gina and Dr Amy. I can only say that I saw on Gina's page what she claims in not there now.
That publishing, that peer
By anon
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 2:16pm
That publishing, that peer review, that everyone here values, has been done by the authors of the papers that she is commenting on or critiquing. She often reports on them within days of their publication.
Her comment on how other countries are cheating to make their statistics look better (http://www.skepticalob.com/2012/03/international-c...) was based on the analysis published by Canadian scientists in the peer reviewed British Medical Journal (BMJ) the previous month. It is linked right there in the post, for you to see for yourself.
Her comment on how infant mortality is the wrong measure of a country's obstetric care is based on the World Health Organization's opinion of the best measure of obstetric care - it's not just her opinion, and she didn't just pull it out of thin air, as you imply. http://www.skepticalob.com/2011/08/infant-mortalit...
The sad truth about the perinatal mortality rate of Dutch homebirths is, again, from a study performed by Dutch scientists and published in the British Medical Journal. http://www.skepticalob.com/2011/07/dutch-homebirth... It was published in 2010. So while it seems to be news to one commenter here, it is not really all that recent. Tuteur's opinion, again, is not based on thin air, but on peer reviewed, published research.
Ugly bullying
By Anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 10:47am
Ms Crosley-Corcoran has at the least violated (a strong word but one which I believe is appropriate) reasonable boundaries of disagreement. To accuse Dr. Tuteur of being a terrorist and to compare her to Westboro Baptist Church adherents is purely ad hominem. It is solely a personal attack.
To complain that Dr. Tuteur's posting the middle finger salute photograph is bizarre. It is hypocritical complaint since Crosley-Corcoran already posted for public viewing. (Obviously a photograph delivering a gross insult has nothing to do with any reasonable discussion). But worse, Ms Crosley-Corcoran implies she can abuse anyone she wants, but when someone objects by proving the abuse happened (by posting the picture in the same medium) suddenly Ms Crosley-Corcoran wrings her hands and cries abuse against her. So she can bully and abuse a person but when the victim defends herself suddenly Ms Crosley-Corcoran is the victim?
This sounds exactly like the behavior of a person who tries get their way in the world by intimidation, bullying and abuse. The individual tears through life trampling on other people, shouting down, abusing and bullying anyone who gets in their way. But when someone stands up to them they suddenly fall down like Gollum crying foul. In their mind they can violate anyone they can get away with. But when that violation is challenged suddenly they become Polly Perfect.
Anytime you refer
By Strange
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 3:25pm
to a Dr as "Dr", you come off like an "asshole".
Eighty six comments. God
By NotWhitey
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 7:08pm
Eighty six comments. God knows what would happen if a midwife on a bicycle was hit by a bus.
A midwife on a bicycle hit by a bus
By adamg
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 7:15pm
In the parking lot of the JP Whole Foods.
I almost added Whole Foods -
By NotWhitey
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 10:39pm
I almost added Whole Foods - and a cop eating a donut - but I was afraid heads would explode.
With an off-leash dog?
By anon
Sun, 01/27/2013 - 10:59pm
?
Thank you"..
By Sally
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 7:19am
Just a lowly regular catching up on the brouhaha and these made me laugh so hard...bless you for starting my Monday off right.
Whew!
By Brian Riccio
Mon, 01/28/2013 - 3:15pm
After all that, you should change the title to:
"Blog flamewar winds up on local blog!"
You think this page is blowing up
By anon
Tue, 01/29/2013 - 8:31pm
Check out the source of the controversy at the skeptical ob. Chock full of rabid Dr. Amy fans and occasional pop-ins by dismayed natural birthers and the occasional Gina fan. You could escape reality for hours in there.
These women are not interesting to me but the argument is
By crdbrdgrl
Tue, 01/29/2013 - 2:52am
Just for shits and giggles when was the last time an EMT, firefighter or police officer failed to manage a successful delivery on the road or wherever those silly women find themselves (because they weren't planning to have a baby)?
I was born in the UK in a hospital but my brother was born at home, as was standard practice after a successful delivery. (I question all the tripe here about European home birth walk-back).
My children were both born in hospitals via midwife only practices, and I was never attended to by an OB during pregnancy. My second time around an OB friend flirted with the option of a home birth with me (but we decided it was undoable by US standards). We both wished we had been able to work it out.
How and where to give birth is no different from deciding if, or when, to commit to a pregnancy. Our choice for so many reasons. Stupid women, stupid men.
Lady Sybil, RIP.
The one thing I learned from
By anon
Mon, 02/17/2014 - 11:23pm
The one thing I learned from this saga, is most people are drama llamas and people with money like to take it to the next level of hysterics. Funny, I guess it means they have more dollars than sense.
Pages
Add comment