UK father ****** to deliver own baby in maternity ward

[WifeLuver]

In the United Kingdom, hospitals are under-funded and under-staffed.

A father was ****** to deliver his own baby in a maternity ward after the midwife abandoned them. Thomas Howard, 33, frantically pressed the emergency buzzer to alert staff at the Royal Blackburn Hospital, Lancashire, for help when he realized the newborn's arrival was imminent. But when no one at the maternity suite arrived to deliver the baby, he had to act. Father-of-five Mr Howard said by the time the midwife had returned, his partner Emily Baron had already given birth.

Emily, 26, had been taken to hospital after going into labour. After arranging for family members to look after their other children, Thomas arrived half an hour later and noticed Emily was losing blood. 'When I asked the midwife if this was normal she said she didn't know, which didn't fill me with confidence at all,' said Mr Howard.

'She then went away, leaving me and Emily on our own. It was then I noticed the baby's head coming through. I pressed the buzzer to get some assistance, but nobody came and I decided that I would have to step in. 'I have never done anything like it before, but I've seen others do it a few times, so I had a rough idea. 'The baby was lying at the end of the bed between Emily's legs and I was cleaning the mucous out of her mouth and making sure she could breathe when the midwife came back in.

'I was in shock at what had happened but the nurse didn't say anything to me. She just carried on as if it was normal.'

Read more: Mail Online

 

[mhall]

In the United Kingdom, hospitals are under-funded and under-staffed.

QUOTE]

At last - something you spout that almost all will agree with !

 

[shybob9306]

Goverment Healthcare sucks

This is what the democrats want for us. Higher taxes and no service. NO THANKS TO GOVERMENT RUN HEALTHCARE!!!!!!!!!!

 

[whitetrannyAnna]

This is what the democrats want for us. Higher taxes and no service. NO THANKS TO GOVERMENT RUN HEALTHCARE!!!!!!!!!!

You do realise that the US pays more than any other country in the world for healthcare, and yet is about 50th in the WHO rankings?

You can quack all you like about 1 tabloid scare story, but you have almost a third more dead babies in the US that the UK.

deaths per 1000 live births

UK 4.8
USA 6.3

Those numbers are from the UN which I regard as a somewhat better source than the Daily Mail.

Oh and here's a funny thing, if wifeluver is so aghast at racism in the UK, why is he reading the most racist newspaper in the country?

 

[WifeLuver]

How am I supposed to know if any of the sources are racist or not?

Other Sources:

Father ****** to Deliver His Own Baby - FOXNews.com

Father delivers baby in Royal Blackburn Hospital - BBC News

DAD ABANDONED TO DELIVER BABY IN MIDWIFE CRISIS - UK Express

Dad has to deliver his baby - on hospital labour ward - Sheffield Telegraph

 

[nonaming]

you have almost a third more dead babies in the US that the UK.

deaths per 1000 live births

UK 4.8
USA 6.3

Those numbers are from the UN which I regard as a somewhat better source than the Daily Mail.

The Truth About Health Care and Infant Mortality: Lack of access to health care does not explain America's infant mortality rate.

The Truth About Health Care and Infant Mortality - Reason Magazine

"No one denies the problem. Our infant mortality rate is double that of Japan or Sweden. But we live different lives, on average, than people in those places. We suffer more obesity (about 10 times as much as the Japanese), and we have more births to teenagers (seven times more than the Swedes). Nearly 40 percent of American babies are born to unwed mothers.

Factors like these are linked to low birth weight in babies, which is a dangerous thing. In a 2007 study for the National Bureau of Economic Research, economists June O'Neill and Dave O'Neill noted that "a multitude of behaviors unrelated to the health care system such as substance abuse, smoking and obesity" are connected "to the low birth weight and preterm births that underlie the infant death syndrome."

So why does our infant mortality rate exceed that of, say, Canada, where health care is free at the point of service? One reason is that we have a lot more tiny newborns. But underweight babies don't fare worse here than in Canada—quite the contrary.

The NBER paper points out that among the smallest infants, survival rates are better on this side of the border. What that suggests is that if we lived under the Canadian health care system, we would not have a lower rate of infant mortality. We would have a higher one.

A lot of things could be done to keep babies from dying in this country. But the health care "reform" being pushed in Washington is not one of them."

 

[nonaming]

The method of calculating IMR often varies widely between countries based on the way they define a live birth and how many premature infants are born in the country. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines a live birth as any born human being who demonstrates independent signs of life, including breathing, voluntary muscle movement, or heartbeat. Many countries, however, including certain European states and Japan, only count as live births cases where an infant breathes at birth, which makes their reported IMR numbers somewhat lower and raises their rates of perinatal mortality.[5]

The exclusion of any high-risk infants from the denominator or numerator in reported IMRs can be problematic for comparisons. Many countries, including the United States, Sweden or Germany, count an infant exhibiting any sign of life as alive, no matter the month of gestation or the size, but according to United States Centers for Disease Control researchers,[6] some other countries differ in these practices. All of the countries named adopted the WHO definitions in the late 1980s or early 1990s,[7] which are used throughout the European Union.[8] However, in 2009, the US CDC issued a report which stated that the American rates of infant mortality were affected by the United States' high rates of premature babies compared to European countries and which outlines the differences in reporting requirements between the United States and Europe, noting that France, the Czech Republic, Ireland, the Netherlands, and Poland do not report all live births of babies under 500 g and/or 22 weeks of gestation

 

[necoule]

This is what the democrats want for us. Higher taxes and no service. NO THANKS TO GOVERMENT RUN HEALTHCARE!!!!!!!!!!

Hey you forgot to mention about our health service death committees lmao

 

[_Mark_]

Had his missus had a 20 minute labour like mine, he'd have delivered his child in the bathroom with nobody else present and relaid the bathroom carpet the day after. This country's gone soft.

 

[gav67]

My wife had a 22 hour labour! The remote for the TV was misssing i missed the rugby & was nearly sick from the gas!! But the 2 nurses where fit & not fat for a change, they must have been new to the NHS! Sweet...

 

[gav67]

I was bored to death!!

 

[nonaming]

You do realise that the US pays more than any other country in the world for healthcare, and yet is about 50th in the WHO rankings?

U.S. has best health care in world | Charlottesville Daily Progress

U.S. has best health care in world
Walter F. Johnson Albemarle County
Published: February 13, 2010
Updated: February 14, 2010


Every fact and statistic requires a comprehensive evaluation and consideration, including its possible effects to the total area within which it applies, before it can be effectively understood.

Of current major civic subjects, national health care is near the top of the list. Here are some facts warranting understanding:

As recently published by Investor Business Daily, a survey by the U.N. International Health Organization has reported:

Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis: U.S. 65 percent, Eng-land 46 percent, Canada 42 percent.

Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months: U.S. 93 percent, England 15 percent, Canada 43 percent.

Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months: U.S. 90 percent, England 15 percent, Canada 43 percent.

Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month: U.S. 77 percent, England 40 percent, Canada 43 percent.

Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people: U.S. 71, England 14, Canada 18.

Percentage of seniors (65 and older) with low income who say they are in “excellent health”: U.S. 12 percent, England 2 percent, Canada 6 percent.