Home | About | Donate

US the 'Worst Place in the World' to Give Birth: USA Today Investigation


#1

US the 'Worst Place in the World' to Give Birth: USA Today Investigation

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

A new USA Today investigation offers a searing indictment of maternal care in the United States, and says the country "is the most dangerous place in the developed world to give birth."


#2

But the Free Market always provides better services than those “Government run” Health Care systems do!!

I hate to break it to the "Free market is god " crowd but when a for profit operation is delivering health care it will always try to CUT costs to maximize profits. People about to give birth do not “shop around” between providers to see who will offer the best care.


#3

How much more proof do you need, capitalized healthcare is a race to the bottom.


#4

Maybe in the developed world.


#5

Exactly. The headline is so misleading that it falls into the category of “fake news”. The US is still far ahead of, say, Haiti or the DRC, or even India save for its small affluent class, as a place to give birth.


#6

I read the report; it bears mentioning that only hospital births are included in the figures. The number of at-home births (usually attended by mid-wives or doulas) is significant.


#7

Yes - they said so on the USA Today story:

Today, this is the most dangerous place in the developed world to give birth.

Will CD correct this error? No point in being distracted from the true problem at hand.


#8

What % of all births as opposed to just hospital births means significant? The significant part being to whom, exactly? The overall cost of 9 months of pregnancy plus ( ++ post birth care mother/child ) for using midwives, private classes and other preparations ( dieticians, etc ) vs. comparable hospital offerings and their costs?
What is the % of black and/or non-white women in these communities of color using midwives? In their homes or an offsite facility, etc? The liability ( insurance and paid leave, etc ) of midwife use by clients at offsites as opposed to the above-mentioned hospitals ( referred to as black-serving hospitals but would be more accurately described ( imo ) as people of color-serving hospitals. )??
Please explain and elaborate more fully ( significantly ) on my questions, if you can? Thanks in advance.
BTW- The article doesn’t mention hospitals ( in rural areas or small cities usually ) that simply don’t provide complicated care for pre-and-post difficult pregnancies and refer these patients to hospitals who do. Cost-shifting comes to mind here. Please someone, is that in this expose?


#9

mrsannhitts wrote:

‘What % of all births as opposed to just hospital births means significant?..’

By “significant” I mean “not to be discounted”. And the article certainly ignores the increasing number of women who realize that parturition is not a medical procedure, nor is pregnancy an illness. Hospitals and their resources are intended for treatment of the sick and injured. A hospital stay puts a person at considerable risk of infection and iatrogenic illnesses.


#10

I work at one. Primarily with children, mothers and concerned family members. All under duress, as they say.
Pregnancy is not an illness. Neither is poverty or skin color. White privilege is a national plague and mentally debilitating one, however. In 99.9% of cases studied most whites has a virulent form of it at some point. Usually when buying property and investing in community facilities besides golf courses or policing. :grinning:
Thanks for getting back to me.


#11

US is ahead of Haiti???

Wow!

We’re certainly not ahead of Cuba – !!!


#12

I’d certainly agree and think most women who had babies delivered in hospitals would agree.

And shockingly – though I didn’t notice a mention of Cesareans in the article – young women are being encouraged in the US to set a “date” for delivery. Which means a Cesarean! This is where there is no pre-determined need for a Cesarean. Young females are encouraged to think of the convenience of setting a date … which, of course, is also a matter of convenience for the doctor.

Have read recently that there is a strong and sad rise in child mortality, especially among AAs.

And, having had some exposure recently to an older neighbor/friend having entered an “Assisted living” facility, I would say we the general public has no idea of the vastness of the problem of Alzheimer’s disease among our elderly – or that Alzheimer’s has a good deal in common with Autism and Schizophrenia.

I’ve seen doctors continue to recommend medications which they HAD to know would eventually cause serious problems. I see the continuing PROGRAM to involve Seniors in “every three month” visitations to doctors — and I’m very aware that those “every three month” blood tests do NOT protect them from very serious side effects which are only detected when they have already done damage to the patients.

I think – aside from the too few doctors who do care about patients – that too many of our doctors realize that they have been poorly trained and they don’t have the guts or the courage to challenge the institution of medicine. This also applies to dentists.

Hard to believe that so many still recommend vaccination!!!


#13

Do we have non-black serving hospitals? What is a “black serving hospital?”


#14

A hospital that is in an area where most of the patients are black. Since our blacks are ghettoized for the most part, these are urban city hospitals. So they serve blacks.


#15

This is only part of it though. The other half is that our infant mortality rate is the highest among the developed countries.
And for both stats, red states are more dangerous for the most part. The ave is 5.9, yet Miss and Ala are 8.8 and 8.5.
Our health care for giving birth is dismal compared to other countries in europe and Japan.
Part of the problem is lack of pre-natal care and post natal care in many areas. Planned parenthood has been attacked and many of it’s clinics that offer health care have been closed. Lack of health insurance so that women can go to doctors. Lack of doctors and healthcare in poor areas.
The lie is that the republicans are pro-life, so no abortion. The reality is that they are not pro anything, they could care less. And women and children pay the price. The lie is that the free market which demands profits over life will provide the best health care.
Having a single payer would not get rid of all the problems like lack of doctors in poor areas, but it would help a great deal. Having a way to create more doctors and nurses would help also.
One way to help is to offer doctors essentially free education for public service in poor areas for a set amount of time. They work in poor areas w/o doctors and work off the debt that way. They have no crushing debt to pay off and can offer their services for a more moderate price. Later they can move on. They get the training and we get needed doctors in areas that don’t attract doctors.
I worked in the medical field and know doctors that tell me that they have debts of 200-300K when they get out. And those loans have to be paid off or else interest accrues.
With single payer we can set the price a doctor can charge. By helping doctors, they don’t have the excuse of debt that needs to be paid off.


#16

True, but it is compared to developed countries. Countries that are supposed to be able to do better. One wouldn’t expect a really poor country to have the best healthcare. As the world’s richest country, we should be able to do better.


#17

Disturbing enough to realize that there are people holding public office who care so little or “just plain don’t care at all” …

But when you realize that they are human beings who are PAID to “not care” it’s even more shattering.

Thanks for the info!