4 ms·

It's correct that the infant mortality rate in The Netherlands is somewhat higher than neigbouring countries (the sixth highest of European countries), the caus

It's correct that the infant mortality rate in The Netherlands is somewhat higher than neigbouring countries (the sixth highest of European countries), the cause of this is not exactly clear. There was a study in 2010 that drew much media attention, which reached the conclusion that you are talking about. However, the methodology drew some criticism, and followup research (e.g. this https://www.midwiferyjournal.com/article/S0266-6138(15)00214-4/abstract https://www.midwiferyjournal.com/article/S0266-6138(15)00214... from 2015) has contradicted the results. Comparing home and hospital birth can be a difficult problem. Policy in The Netherlands dictates that women who are estimated to have a higher risk of complications must give birth at a hospital. This means that the hospital group's risk profile is inherently different, which is a factor that is difficult to compensate for. It also seems that lower educated women gain more safety from hospital birth, although the exact reasons are unclear. Overall the question is not at all settled at the moment. The research community is also extremely hesitant to communicate with the media out of fear of causing another scare like what happened after the 2010 study. Fact is that home birth is becoming increasingly more rare, down 10 percentage points over the last 10 years.

tralarpa 7y ago
Thanks for the link to the 2015 paper. I read the original paper around 2013 and didn't actively look for followup papers in the last years.
avar 7y ago
This 2004 paper examining the difference in infant mortality in The Netherlands[1] concludes that it's basically due to immigration, parents being older (father's age is also a factor), and fertility treatments. Some ethnic groups in The Netherlands have 2x higher infant mortality after birth than others, people are older when they're having kids, and having twins (or more) is now 2x as common as in the 1950s due to the availability of fertility treatment. I wonder how up-to-date the results of that older paper are, the other ones discussed here seem to address much narrower questions. 1. https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol11/13/11-13.pdf https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol11/13/11-13....
stjohnswarts 7y ago
Having a baby at home is silly given it has a higher mortality rate than in a hospital environment. I think after leaving the hospital have a helping hand is great as is before the birth with the pregnant mom's habits. However the most dangerous time is the actual birth and I would much rather have trained physicians around than a midwife.

tralarpa 7y ago

Thanks for the link to the 2015 paper. I read the original paper around 2013 and didn't actively look for followup papers in the last years.

avar 7y ago

This 2004 paper examining the difference in infant mortality in The Netherlands[1] concludes that it's basically due to immigration, parents being older (father's age is also a factor), and fertility treatments. Some ethnic groups in The Netherlands have 2x higher infant mortality after birth than others, people are older when they're having kids, and having twins (or more) is now 2x as common as in the 1950s due to the availability of fertility treatment. I wonder how up-to-date the results of that older paper are, the other ones discussed here seem to address much narrower questions. 1. https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol11/13/11-13.pdf https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol11/13/11-13....

stjohnswarts 7y ago

Having a baby at home is silly given it has a higher mortality rate than in a hospital environment. I think after leaving the hospital have a helping hand is great as is before the birth with the pregnant mom's habits. However the most dangerous time is the actual birth and I would much rather have trained physicians around than a midwife.