Some of these letter writers act as if ALL midwives who agree to home-births can be painted with a broad strok as witnessed by this comment from Darwinian: Had we "trusted" a midwife to wait until the problems were severe enough to convince her to let my wife drive to a hospital, it's likely both would have died, I'm firmly convinced.

What are you basing this on? An actual experience with a midwife or just your perception of how a "typical" midwife acts?

I don't know about you, but I live in a college town with a lot of midwives and they run the spectrum from very conservative to very liberal in their views of birth. Some are very pro-technology and will only deliever in a hospital, some will only agree to homebirths if the mother-to-be lives with certain mileage to one of the two hospitals in town, while others will take on higher-risk clients and agree to homebirths in rural settings.

Speaking as someone who opted for a homebirth, my midwives fell in the middle. They only took on low-risk clients, and prepared me (and all their clients) for the possibility of being transported to a hospital. I will also add that they had extensive medical training and did not hesitate to suggest seeing a doctor or even giving birth in a hospital if they suspected anything was wrong. At no point was it ever suggested to me that I would be considered a failure had I needed medical intervention.

This whole idea of ALL midwives insisting on a home-birth no matter what dangers it entails to mother and baby is wholly unfair and inaccurate to the vast majority of midwives I have had the pleasure of meeting and working with over the years.

In my case, I sought out a home-birth because I felt it was best for me and my baby. Some women can and should give birth only in a hospital setting. I strongly feel it is a personal choice and up to the individual. For those of us, though, who opt not to do so, we should be given the right to be seen as individuals and not lumped together as being part of some "overzealous" movement.

quite frankly, Rihanna be 6'5" and called Brown every name under the sun and even slapped him and that still would not give him or any man the right to have hit her. This idea of Brown "defending" himself is bs. If she hit him, then he should have gotten out of the car, gotten away from her, and called the police.

Judging by the police report and that infamous photo, this was not a case of him merely pushing her away in an attempt to defend his person. Indeed, it appears she was hit multiple times. The mere fact that people are even trying to blame this on Rihanna illustrates that the old "blame the victim" act is alive and well.

Whatever happened to hitting is wrong? Period. If someone hits you, that does not give you an automatic right to hit them back. IMO, a "real man" would walk away from a woman from hit him rather than strike back at her.

People can make all the excuses that they want for Brown, but nothing justifies the fact that this appears to be an out-of-control young man who raises his fists to someone he supposedly "loves."

As others pointed out, the vast majority of women in the US who give birth at home is still very, very small esp. compared to other countries like The Netherlands or UK.

I also don't see this huge backlash against hospital births, nor do I see the vast majority of homebirthers saying that it is for everyone and should be foisted on everybody.

Based on my personal experience, Hubby and I were seen by many as freaks who were putting our baby at risk. In most cases, it did no good to assure people that our midwives were trained medical professionals who worked with doctors or that we had a back-up hospital birth plan in the event of complications. We also had to constantly explain that we were not anti-hospital and did not have anything against those who chose to give birth in a hospital.

Still, the comments by some on here shows that attitude still prevails or in the words of drsteveothat the vast majorities of us who chose to give birth at home do so because we are "unaware of the risks". Sigh!

If the attitudes expressed on here in anyway reflect how the majority of the US public feels about the Rihanna/Brown situation then we truly have an uphill battle on changing the way domestic violence is seen and handled in the U.S.

What part of "hitting is wrong" do you not understand? This is something that most of us grasp before the age of 5.

that someone quoted awhile back about the number of women vs. men who are victims of domestic violence flew right over the heads of the posters on here who believe Chris Brown was merely "defending" himself or see men in general as victims of big, bad feminists.

I remember a small but vocal minority expressing concern over various laws that were passed shortly after the Scott Peterson Media Circus designed to "protect" the rights of "unborn children." At the time, the MSM said nothing about those who opposed these laws possibly because the hysteria surrounding the Peterson case.

It's scary to think that these very legislators who for the most part oppose increased educational funding, aid to poor families, and welfare in general think more about a clump of cells than actual children who are already here. These people aren't really pro-life, but rather pro-birth because it seems once you are here, you're on your own, suckers!