Childbirth deaths in the U.S. highest in decades
Categories: Just For Moms, Pregnancy & Birth
Compared to 90 years ago, death from childbirth is pretty rare. Back then, nearly one in every 100 births in the U.S. resulted in the death of the mother. But by 2004, those numbers were drastically changed, with only 13 deaths per 100,000 live births. But those 13 deaths were one more than we saw in 2003 - and 2003 was the first year the death rate rose above 10 since 1977.
In other words, the death rate from childbirth is rising and experts are debating the reasons. One reason could be the fact that more women are having children later in life, resulting in higher-risk pregnancies. Some experts point to maternal obesity, which often results in diabetes and associated complications. Plus, an obese woman might have a larger baby, making vaginal delivery difficult. Which brings us to Caesarean sections. Currently, 29 percent of all births are via C-section - a number health professional say is far higher than it should be. Women who have had multiple C-sections are at a higher risk of excessive bleeding, which a New York study found to be the leading cause of maternal death.
Some say that the higher numbers are likely due to a combination of all of the above as well as a change in how deaths are reported in some states, resulting in more of them being linked to childbirth.
The fact that the rate of death from childbirth is rising surprises and alarms me. And while 13 may not seem like a big number, it is the biggest number in the world to a family who has lost a mother.
In other words, the death rate from childbirth is rising and experts are debating the reasons. One reason could be the fact that more women are having children later in life, resulting in higher-risk pregnancies. Some experts point to maternal obesity, which often results in diabetes and associated complications. Plus, an obese woman might have a larger baby, making vaginal delivery difficult. Which brings us to Caesarean sections. Currently, 29 percent of all births are via C-section - a number health professional say is far higher than it should be. Women who have had multiple C-sections are at a higher risk of excessive bleeding, which a New York study found to be the leading cause of maternal death.
Some say that the higher numbers are likely due to a combination of all of the above as well as a change in how deaths are reported in some states, resulting in more of them being linked to childbirth.
The fact that the rate of death from childbirth is rising surprises and alarms me. And while 13 may not seem like a big number, it is the biggest number in the world to a family who has lost a mother.
Recent Posts
- Movies May Influence Children's Food Choices, Study Shows (2/09/2010)
- Report Cites 220 Cases of D.C. Teachers Abusing Students (2/09/2010)
- Chicago Candidate Drops Out of Race With Tearful Child On Display (2/09/2010)
- Juicy, But Not Juice (2/09/2010)
- Carrie Underwood Worms Her Way Onto 'Sesame Street' (2/09/2010)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
smdryad 8-25-2007 @ 6:24PM
A couple thoughts. Developed countries that have midwives do most deliveries have lower rates of complications. The standard practice of epidurals, inductions, woman lying flat on her back to labor and deliver, and high c-section rate are not serving us well. Also maternal nutrition has an effect on her ability to labor effectively. The muscles of the uterus must be in top shape to contract properly and make labor more efficient. The routine of starving the mother during labor isn't helping either.
In general, the Standard American Diet (SAD) of highly processed foods doesn't not feed the body well enough for optimal health. The increasing obesity rate is just part of the resulting problem. Our diet has changed our bone structure over generations, and not for the better. This can be another factor in difficult deliveries. A lot of the problems related to the SAD are not immediately apparent, but creep up over time. I hope the medical community starts looking at why the maternal mortality rate is going up, and takes action on this. I have very little hope that nutrition will factor into their assessment, but lets hope they can take a fresh look at their practices in obstetrics, anyway.
Jen
http://www.squidoo.com/safecleaning
Reply
Jenna 8-25-2007 @ 9:31PM
Well that's surely not encouraging for pregnant women this year. Eep. :(
Reply
Lacy 8-25-2007 @ 11:51PM
My MEDICALLY NECESSARY c-section is scheduled for tomorrow morning. This article that has been floating around the internet for the last two days has successfully taken my joy and excitement and turned it into total and complete fear and worry. It really sucks.
Reply
Karen 8-26-2007 @ 1:02AM
I totally agree with smdryad. Docs don't advise women about anything other than "gaining too much weight." My midwife advised me specifically on consuming lean protein and no processed junk. Docs advise convenience inductions, while my midwife enabled me to have a peaceful natural homebirth. I think that our maternal mortality rate will decrease when we reserve OBs for the high-risk women among us and get back to basics with women supporting other women in birth and having midwives attend low-risk women.
Reply
Kellie 8-26-2007 @ 7:36AM
I completely agree with Karen. A low-risk mother should not need an OB. We could take an example from other countries who use midwives first and OB's when there is a risk. Those countries have lower maternal and child death rates than the US and they have declined instead of increased.
After a horrible labor that resulted in an emergency c-section with my son, we are opting for a home birth with this baby (i'm due in 3 1/2 weeks). It's amazing that in the US, a home birth has less risk (statistically proven) than a hospital birth. I couldn't believe it when I really started to look into it.
There is a very real need for an OB. A very real need. Not every woman has a low risk pregnancy and not every woman can birth at home or a birth center or even the hospital with a midwife. OB's are needed, just not as much as we believe.
Reply