Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees

cdc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 187 posts

Re: Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees

#21

Post by simonsarris »

Reminder when comparing with other nations that as this study states: "Pregnancy-related deaths occurred during pregnancy, delivery, and up to a year postpartum."

The measure can be very different elsewhere. The WHO defines a maternal death as "the death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the duration and the site of the pregnancy, from any cause related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management, but not from accidental or incidental causes."

you'll notice in this study that 30.0% of deaths occurred 43–365 days postpartum, so you will have to adjust numbers accordingly if you are comparing the USA to what most other countries measure. (and not all use the WHO definition!) The reason they use the 42 day cutoff is I assume to aid with other-country comparison. Still lots of websites that compare maternal mortality across the world get this wrong, and compare USA deaths for a full year vs other country deaths for 30-60 days postpartum.

Re: Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees

#22

Post by kube-system »

malfist wrote: post #2

Maternity healthcare in the US is one of the worst in the developed nations. And yet we're banning abortion, and doing nothing to fix it. Even WIC has came under attack in the past. Protecting the unborn is very convenient. They make no demands of you. Edit: WIC: Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic

I have family that specializes in high-risk pregnancy care -- much of the problems they deal with are rooted in drug addiction. That really needs to be fixed before you can have a successful pregnancy even with the best care.

Re: Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees

#23

Post by andrewla »

This article is disturbing on many levels. The sound bite that the US has a problem with maternity healthcare is ingrained, but this makes me take a second look.

First is that we report maternal mortality even when not directly associated with birth -- "Among pregnancy-related deaths with information on timing, 53% occurred 7–365 days postpartum." Is that standard for reporting countries? Is our problem with maternity healthcare really a problem of better reporting?

Secondly is that 22.7% of the deaths are related to "mental health conditions". From the footnote, "Mental health conditions include deaths of suicide, overdose/poisoning related to substance use disorder, and other deaths determined by the MMRC to be related to a mental health condition, including substance use disorder." This is extraordinarily disturbing!

Re: Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees

#24

Post by nsxwolf »

malfist wrote: post #2

Maternity healthcare in the US is one of the worst in the developed nations. And yet we're banning abortion, and doing nothing to fix it. Even WIC has came under attack in the past. Protecting the unborn is very convenient. They make no demands of you. Edit: WIC: Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic

Are you saying the solution to maternity related deaths is abortion here? Eliminating maternal death by eliminating maternity? I don't understand.

Re: Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees

#25

Post by notch656a »

mikestew wrote: post #14
notch656a wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WIC is way overcomplicated for what it is. Just cut a check for the value of the goods you want to provide and be done with it. No excuse for the insane bloat and overhead associated with WIC.

Just cut a check for the value of the goods you want to provide and be done with it. Are you under the assumption that your suggestion hasn't been tried (and subsequently found wanting)?

Having shopped in some pretty impoverished area (and worked as a grocery store cashier for more than 1 year), WIC and EBT for people who were going to use the value for bad/other purposes is just giving cash with extra steps. What they end up doing is hawking the goods (or vouchers) on the street for diapers, the rent, crack, gas, whatever it may be they need the money for.

Just cut out the bloat and give the cash, IMO.

Re: Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees

#27

Post by csdvrx »

It's a theoretical claim (unproved, as acting on a system changes the system)

Also, it's missing the crucial implication: at what price?

With infinite amount of money, there are many things we could do. We don't have infinite money.

Consider how the richest EU state in adjusted PPP per capita (so price levels can't be blamed) is just now barely richer than the poorest US state, in both the median and average

Do we really want to become that poor? Is equality (in everyone being poor) a social goal?

Re: Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees

#28

Post by malfist »

nsxwolf wrote: post #24
malfist wrote: post #2

Maternity healthcare in the US is one of the worst in the developed nations. And yet we're banning abortion, and doing nothing to fix it. Even WIC has came under attack in the past. Protecting the unborn is very convenient. They make no demands of you. Edit: WIC: Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic

Are you saying the solution to maternity related deaths is abortion here? Eliminating maternal death by eliminating maternity? I don't understand.

It is certainly one alternative here. Not the only.

There's no reason abortion should be safe, legal and rare. And there's no reason we should be having such a high rate of preventable maternity related deaths.

Re: Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees

#29

Post by neves »

andrewla wrote: post #23

This article is disturbing on many levels. The sound bite that the US has a problem with maternity healthcare is ingrained, but this makes me take a second look. First is that we report maternal mortality even when not directly associated with birth -- "Among pregnancy-related deaths with information on timing, 53% occurred 7–365 days postpartum." Is that standard for reporting countries? Is our problem with maternit…

USA is the richest country of the world and does not have paid maternity leave. It is very weird and my hypothesis is that this fact relates to these mental health conditions.

Re: Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees

#30

Post by ok_dad »

dfxm12 wrote: post #8
malfist wrote: post #2

Maternity healthcare in the US is one of the worst in the developed nations. And yet we're banning abortion, and doing nothing to fix it. Even WIC has came under attack in the past. Protecting the unborn is very convenient. They make no demands of you. Edit: WIC: Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic

Not just banning abortion, but any medicine that could maybe possibly be used as an abortifacient, even if it is normally prescribed medicine for something else. Some women suffering from arthritis can't get methotrexate for example.

> Some women suffering from arthritis can't get methotrexate for example.

Or, some kids can be denied access (even temporarily is a shame):

https://www.kold.com/2022/10/01/teen-girl-denied-medication-...

Post reply on HN