Freebirthing Australia: When Kerry Chose No Medical Help, Her Husband Relied on Facebook 

EXCLUSIVE 

When Kerry Pitman decided to deliver her first child without professional medical assistance, the process turned into a 51-hour ordeal. During this time, her partner, Mathew Hadfield, relied almost exclusively on a Facebook group for guidance. 

Pitman, 43, and Hadfield, 39, from Queensland, Australia, made the decision to "freebirth" their daughter amidst difficulties finding care. The risks associated with Pitman's Type 1 diabetes led 27 midwives to reject their request for assistance. 

Their solution eventually came in the form of an unregistered Italian midwife discovered on Facebook. This "birthkeeper", Laura Latina, arrived from Sydney and was a constant presence through the duration of the labor. The process was further assisted by a doula in Canada, offering support over the phone throughout the two-day process that culminated in the birth of baby Teilo at their Brisbane home. 

Latina's involvement, however, has triggered action by health authorities. In December, they took steps to prohibit the unregistered midwife from attending future births. 

What is Freebirthing? 

Freebirthing is a deeply controversial method of childbirth. It involves intentionally giving birth without any medical professionals present. A woman might labor alone, alongside a partner, or with assistance from a doula or similar support person, but registered healthcare providers are excluded. 

While not illegal, a doula (or birthkeeper) cannot legally provide medical advice, assistance, or carry essential equipment. 

Pitman began her labor prematurely at just 36 weeks of pregnancy. With no birth preparation supplies on hand, the couple placed an urgent request for help on the Homebirth Australia Facebook group. 

During the 51-hour process, Pitman endured numerous challenges under Latina's guidance. Hadfield, meanwhile, used the Facebook group for both practical support and advice. 

A Debate Erupts on Facebook 

Hadfield's posts sparked intense controversy among the 14,000 followers of the Homebirth Australia page. Opinions were fiercely divided – some argued Pitman should have prioritized medical help, while others defended her right to birth naturally. 

These posts further highlight an ongoing rift between credentialed midwives and unregulated support workers like doulas regarding the safety of freebirthing. 

Obstacles and Pushback 

Hadfield disclosed one major complication calling it the "wild element" of Pitman's birth experience. In his view, a registered midwife would have immediately sent her to a hospital, but Latina allowed the home labor to continue. During this time, Pitman's labor stalled twice. 

The first stall lasted a full 12 hours and was caused by a state of ketosis. Ketosis occurs when the body utilizes fat as its main energy source, rather than glucose. This condition can pose severe risks for Pitman due to her diabetes. Through nutrition, hydration, and rest, the couple managed to resolve the situation. 

Six hours later, another major challenge arose - a full bladder preventing the baby from descending properly. This second stall found Hadfield desperately pleading for a catheter on the Homebirth Australia page, a request that went unfulfilled. 

In desperation, he called an ambulance but was told that paramedics weren't authorized to carry catheters. They also refused to legally hand over a nasogastric tube for alternative use. 

Eventually, paramedics did provide a nasogastric tube (which is normally inserted into the stomach through the nose). However, this was adapted by Latina for use as a makeshift catheter, enabling Pitman to relieve her bladder. With this obstacle cleared, Teilo was born in the family's living room two and a half hours later, at 2 am on December 6, 2020. 

Following the birth, Teilo experienced two concerning hypoglycemic events, characterized by dangerously low blood sugar levels. These episodes, along with Pitman's complicated labor, drew attention from authorities. Police arrived at the home, but Hadfield refused to cooperate. He stated afterward he would not engage with police or Child Services, who also made an inquiry following the birth. 

The Aftermath: Restrictions and Controversy 

Latina's involvement sparked an investigation by the Office of the Health Ombudsman. As a result, the office issued an order temporarily barring her from future involvement in births. The order also mandated that any advertising for her services must explicitly mention this restriction. 

Latina has since left Australia, however, she continues to advertise and offer advice online via Instagram and Facebook. No mention of the imposed restrictions has been made on her accounts. When questioned via Instagram, Latina deflected inquiries stating, "It's not up to me to talk about others' birth." 

While Hadfield maintains that he doesn't recall direct contact with the ombudsman's office regarding the birth, he asserted that he wouldn't have cooperated if approached, emphasizing his support for Latina. 

Last year, police contacted Hadfield about a missing medical device- a catheter, rather than the nasogastric tube that was borrowed. Despite all of this, Hadfield displays an unwavering mistrust of traditional medical institutions, characterizing the healthcare system as "barbaric". 

Understanding the Rise of Freebirthing 

Midwifery professor Hannah Dahlen of Western Sydney University notes that while the exact numbers are unknown, there's clear evidence that freebirthing is on the rise. 

Dahlen links this increase to Covid-driven developments. The pandemic caused a surge in home birth requests. When those demands couldn't be met, some women turned to unregulated birth workers for support. 

The System Under Scrutiny 

Professor Dahlen believes that unregulated birth workers thrive due to gaps in the healthcare system, with a particular focus on issues in southern Queensland (where this incident occurred). She notes that home birthing is now publicly funded in that region. 

Dahlen is critical of unregulated birth workers, stressing that they operate outside their expertise. Some may have limited training, sometimes as brief as a week-long course. This lack of comprehensive medical knowledge is a significant concern. 

"Women put immense trust in the figures around them during birth. That trust comes with immense responsibility," Dahlen emphasizes. "[The birthkeeper's role] can't solely revolve around comforting ideas – at times, it means making difficult decisions to safeguard the well-being of both mother and child." 

However, she also suggests that perhaps some regulations could be beneficial. She advocates for standards of practice for doulas, including guidelines stating that they shouldn't attend unassisted births or engage in clinical examinations. 

"I worry about heavy-handed regulations. They could drive the practice underground, ultimately creating even more risk," Dahlen warns, highlighting the delicate balance needed. "It's crucial that women understand the nature of the care they are receiving and can make informed choices. Their autonomy matters." 

Whose Fault? Women vs. the Medical System 

While some might place the blame squarely on these women's choices, Dahlen takes a more systemic view. "Our focus needs to be on fixing the issues driving this trend within the healthcare system. We're failing to offer sufficient midwifery-led care models that many women crave. That failure pushes them to seek alternatives, landing them in these uncertain fringes of the birth world," she says. 

"The system must take responsibility for providing the kind of care these women want," she continues. "There are deeply irresponsible figures on social media, preying on women's fears – no doubt about it. But the current medical system is failing women on an equal scale, simply in a different way." 

Unanswered Questions 

Pitman and Hadfield's case raises a plethora of complex questions. While the birth outcome for mother and baby was ultimately positive, the process itself was fraught with challenges and controversies. 

Did Pitman's diabetes warrant a strictly hospital-based birth, as the midwives believed? Could the complications have been anticipated and mitigated in a more supervised environment? Even without medical complications, was this scenario inherently too risky? 

On the other hand, is it fair to deny women the birth experience they so clearly desire? Would Pitman have even considered a hospital birth with the support of a collaborative, home-birth-friendly midwife? Is the system so broken that these are the choices women face? 

The Need for Collaboration 

One possibility suggested by experts like Professor Dahlen is a shift towards a more collaborative birthing model. Imagine a greater openness to midwives working in tandem with doulas, creating a balanced framework. The midwives provide the essential medical expertise, while doulas offer emotional and physical support within safe, well-defined boundaries. 

Ultimately, a broader, more inclusive conversation is needed. This cannot simply be about demonizing choices like freebirthing. We must examine the root causes pushing women toward risky alternatives, and find ways to improve the maternal healthcare system to better serve the needs of all mothers-to-be. 

Beyond Kerry and Mathew: The Wider Trend 

While Kerry Pitman and Mathew Hadfield's case is dramatic, it reflects a wider trend rippling through Australia and other parts of the world. Freebirthing, or opting for births even further removed from medical care (sometimes called "wild births"), is gaining ground. However, quantifying the true scale of this phenomenon proves difficult. 

Precise statistics are challenging to obtain. Women engaged in freebirthing may be reluctant to self-identify due to fear of judgment. Some experts believe that social media echo chambers amplify the issue, making it seem more prevalent than it truly is. Yet, with stories like Pitman's making headlines, there's no doubt that this choice is gaining visibility. 

What motivates this shift toward less conventional birthing methods? While each story has its unique reasons, there are some common threads emerging. 

Loss of Control: A Factor in Women's Choices 

Many women who pursue freebirth voice a feeling of disempowerment within the traditional medical system. Rigid protocols, routine interventions, and a perceived lack of respect for natural processes can alienate them. This drives a desire to reclaim authority over their bodies and their birth experiences. 

Further, there's a growing awareness of birth trauma stemming from negative hospital experiences. Whether it's due to past complications, a general fear of medical settings, or the effects of over-medication, some women feel safer attempting a birth at home, even with the acknowledged risks. 

The Influence of the Pandemic 

As Professor Dahlen mentioned, the COVID-19 pandemic played a significant role. Hospitals faced surging demands and restrictions, making home births a more appealing option for some. Even after pandemic pressures eased, the shift in perspective persisted for a number of women. 

This underscores the lack of available care options within the existing system. With limited access to midwife-led home birth programs, freebirthing filled a gap – albeit one filled with inherent danger for many women. 

A Solution, or More of the Problem? 

The unregulated world of birthkeepers and doulas can offer a sense of community and support sorely lacking in the conventional system. However, this also presents fresh concerns. Many of these figures operate within a web of online groups and forums, spreading information that ranges from helpful to outright harmful 

In some cases, this can lead to an echo chamber, where dangerous practices are embraced and legitimate medical concerns are brushed aside. For vulnerable and determined women, this can create an environment where well-intentioned advice morphs into a path with significant risk. 

Needed: Open Dialogue and Collaborative Care Models 

The rise of freebirthing should be a wake-up call to the broader medical community. There's a clear need for more dialogue and collaboration between midwives, obstetricians, and other healthcare providers. It's about acknowledging that women are seeking alternative birthing experiences and understanding the motivations behind those choices. 

Could greater openness to home births under the care of qualified midwives reduce the number of women turning to unregulated alternatives? Could protocols be revised to give women greater agency within hospital settings? Would investing in more midwife-led maternity care improve overall options for expectant mothers? 

These are the crucial questions to address. Until the medical system becomes more adaptable and responsive, stories like Kerry Pitman's will continue to emerge. 

A Call for Change, Not Condemnation 

While the dangers of choosing freebirthing cannot be ignored, particularly in cases with known medical risks, it's important to avoid demonizing individual women. Many, like Kerry Pitman, are guided by a deep-seated desire to achieve the best birth experience possible. This desire must be heard and respected, even if we disagree with the choices stemming from it. 

Instead of outright condemnation, what's needed is a compassionate and multifaceted approach, one that tackles several key aspects: 

Improved Maternal Care Systems: Expanding midwife-led programs, increasing access to home births under safe conditions, and redesigning hospital protocols to prioritize patient autonomy could help bridge this divide. Offering genuine choices can reduce the appeal of risky alternatives. 

Addressing Misinformation: Countering harmful narratives and anti-medical rhetoric spreading across online birth communities is essential. Providing evidence-based information and fostering open, non-judgmental dialogues between midwives and women considering unconventional options is key. 

Accountability for Unregulated Birth Workers: While not wishing to drive these services underground, establishing clearer ethical guidelines for doulas and birthkeepers is vital. Transparency about their training and limitations will help women make truly informed choices about their care. 

Collaborative Models: Exploring ways for midwives and doulas to work in a regulated partnership could provide the best of both worlds: essential medical expertise alongside the emotional and physical support that women find invaluable. 

The Path to Safety and Empowerment 

It's important to note that freebirthing isn't the only path to an empowering birth experience. Many women report profound satisfaction with midwife-led home births or hospital births where they felt respected and supported in their choices. The goal should be to make this the norm, rather than the exception. 

The rise in freebirthing should serve as a powerful reminder that women deserve a voice in their care, that their fears and desires should be taken seriously. Instead of creating greater divides, it's a chance to re-examine systems that fall short of women's needs. When we fail to offer genuine, safe choices, we risk forcing them to seek solutions elsewhere, as Kerry Pitman's story so clearly illustrates. 

A Final Note 

This article aims to shed light on a complex issue and to encourage a dialogue centered on respect and the well-being of women and babies. The safety of mothers and newborns must remain paramount. However, it's imperative to work collectively toward a maternity care system that empowers women to feel safe, supported, and in control of their birth experiences – one that minimizes the perceived need for dangerous alternatives.