Ms Jindalae Skerman1
1Sydney University
Homebirth is an emotive and polarising issue despite being a minority choice (less than 0.4% in 2020). Pregnant people who choose homebirth when they are assessed as “high-risk” are making an even more contentious choice. Discussion of high-risk homebirth also tends to be framed around conflict, such as the potential conflict between the pregnant person’s autonomy and the interests of the foetus. There is also potential conflict between the medical recommendation of care providers with the values and priorities of the pregnant person. However, my argument is that contentious choices such as high-risk homebirth should not be framed as a conflict. Rather, these difficult decisions should be framed through relationships and connection. A pregnant person is in a relationship with their foetus rather than in conflict with it. They are also in a relationship with their care providers. A relational conception of autonomy recognises that strong and supportive relationships with care providers can increase the autonomy of the pregnant person. Such an approach places the pregnant person in the best position to make informed, authentic decisions on behalf of the foetus as well as themselves. Rather than focusing on whether the pregnant person is “right” when they choose high-risk homebirth, I propose that a pragmatic and compassionate approach involves compromise. This way, contentious birth choices may be accommodated rather than leaving these pregnant people unsupported and on the fringes of maternity care.
Biography:
Jindalae Skerman (she / her) is a PhD candidate at Sydney Health Ethics, who submitted her thesis in early 2022. She is interested in the ethical issues around pregnancy and birth. She is otherwise a practicing insurance lawyer based in Perth, Western Australia.