Challenging norms: Making non-normative choices in childbearing. Results of a meta ethnographic review of the literature

Exploring women's motivations to freebirth and their experience of maternity care: A systematic qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Freebirth is currently defined as the deliberate decision to give birth without a regulated healthcare professional. Previous reviews have identified factors influencing women's decision to freebirth, yet there is limited evidence on what is the care experience for women who opt to freebirth.

AIM

To synthesise the qualitative evidence on women's motivations to freebirth and their experience of maternity care when deciding to freebirth.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative evidence synthesis using a sensitive search strategy in May 2022 and August 2023. Twenty-two publications between 2008 and 2023 and from ten different high-income countries were included. Thematic synthesis, underpinned by a feminist standpoint, was used to analyse the data.

FINDINGS

Three main analytical themes were developed in response to each of the review questions. 'A quest for a safer birth' describes the factors influencing women's decision to freebirth. 'Powerful and powerless midwives' describes women's perceptions of their care providers (mostly midwives) and how these perceptions influenced their decision to freebirth. 'Rites of self-protection' describes women's care experiences and self-care practices in the pregnancy leading to freebirth DISCUSSION: Freebirth was rarely women's primary choice but the result of structural and relational barriers to access wanted care. Self-care in the form of freebirth helped women to achieve a positive birth experience and to protect their reproductive self-determination.

CONCLUSION

A new woman-centred definition of freebirth is proposed as the practice to self-care during birth in contexts where emergency maternity care is readily available.

Birth "outside of guidance"-An exploration of a Birth Choices Clinic in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

Decision-making around birthplace is complex and multifactorial. The role of clinicians is to provide unbiased, evidence-based information to support women and birthing people to make decisions based on what matters to them. Some decisions may fall outside of clinical guidance and recommendations. Birth Choices Clinics can provide an opportunity for extended discussion and personalized birthplace planning. This study aimed to explore the rationale behind choosing birthplace "outside of guidance" and examine the outcomes for women who attended a Birth Choices Clinic.

METHODS

The study was descriptive using data extracted from clinical documentation and consultation. The data included demographic information, maternal characteristics, reason for choosing a midwifery-led birth setting, birthplace preference, and outcome.

RESULTS

Eighty-two women used the Birth Choices Clinic between April 2022 and February 2023 in one large maternity unit in the UK. Reasons for choosing birth in a midwifery-led setting included having access to a birthing pool, to reduce the chance of obstetric interventions and pragmatic reasons. Sixty-five percent of women experienced a spontaneous vaginal birth, 10% experienced an assisted vaginal birth, and 23% experienced a cesarean birth. Of the 33 women who ultimately commenced labor care in a midwifery-led setting, 76% (n = 25/33) birthed in this setting without complications. Transfer rates in labor were similar to those in a "low-risk" pregnant population.

DISCUSSION

Birth choice clinics may facilitate an understanding of material risk and support individualizing birth planning. There is evidence that women changed their planned birthplace, possibly in recognition of a move along the risk spectrum.

Medical authority and expectations of conformity: crystallising a key barrier to person-centred care during labour and childbirth

Those giving birth within modern maternity systems are recognised as facing a number of barriers to person-centred care. In this paper, I argue that in order to best facilitate the conditions for positive change, work needs to be done to provide a more granular articulation of the specific barriers. I then offer a nuanced and contextually aware articulation of one key component of the overall failure to ensure person-centred care: medical authority and the expectation of conformity. Articulating these barriers with increased specificity is valuable, as it creates a stronger foundation from which to challenge existing problems which serve to constrain the autonomy of birthing individuals. The analysis offered in this paper also underscores the need for change at an institutional, rather than individual, level.