Key Takeaways:
- The Free Birth Society (FBS) is a US company that promotes an extreme version of free birth, where women abandon any form of prenatal care and give birth without doctors or midwives present.
- FBS has been linked to at least 48 cases of late-term stillbirths or neonatal deaths, and has generated over $13m in revenues since 2018.
- The company’s radical views on birth, shaped by its key figure Yolande Norris-Clark, have been criticized by pro-freebirth advocates and medical professionals.
- FBS’s messaging often resonates with women who have had traumatic experiences of maternity services or unnecessary medical interventions, and who are seeking alternative approaches to birth.
- The company’s business model has been criticized for being misleading and exploitative, with some women reporting that they were falsely advertised to and did not receive the level of care they expected.
Introduction to the Free Birth Society
The Free Birth Society (FBS) is a US company that has been promoting an extreme version of free birth, where women abandon any form of prenatal care and give birth without doctors or midwives present. The company’s key figure, Yolande Norris-Clark, has been instrumental in shaping its radical views on birth, which have been criticized by pro-freebirth advocates and medical professionals. FBS has been linked to at least 48 cases of late-term stillbirths or neonatal deaths, and has generated over $13m in revenues since 2018.
The Story of Emma Cardinal
Emma Cardinal, a 32-year-old holistic practitioner, became pregnant in May 2023 and planned to have a home birth with midwives. However, after listening to a podcast from FBS, she became convinced that ultrasounds were not safe for her baby and decided to freebirth. Cardinal purchased FBS’s video course, "The Complete Guide to Freebirth", and gave birth to her son Floyd, who was stillborn in March 2024. Cardinal was hospitalized with sepsis and had to undergo several surgeries to repair the damage from the birth. She has since spoken out about the dangers of FBS’s messaging and the importance of seeking medical care during pregnancy and childbirth.
The Business Model of FBS
FBS’s business model has been criticized for being misleading and exploitative. The company offers a range of products and services, including video courses and online communities, that promise to empower women to take control of their births. However, some women have reported that they were falsely advertised to and did not receive the level of care they expected. FBS’s messaging often resonates with women who have had traumatic experiences of maternity services or unnecessary medical interventions, and who are seeking alternative approaches to birth. However, the company’s radical views on birth have been criticized for being dangerous and irresponsible.
The Story of Alexandra Smith
Alexandra Smith, a 29-year-old life coach, hired an FBS-trained birth attendant to attend her free birth. However, the attendant was woefully underprepared and missed signs that Smith’s labor was unfolding abnormally. Smith’s son Aksel was born with severe hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy due to oxygen deprivation caused by a placental abruption at birth. Aksel spent five weeks in hospital before being discharged, and died six and a half months later. Smith has since spoken out about the dangers of FBS’s messaging and the importance of seeking medical care during pregnancy and childbirth.
The Regulatory Environment
The regulatory environment surrounding FBS and its affiliates is complex and varied. In Canada, where FBS has a significant following, the company’s messaging has been criticized by medical professionals and health authorities. The British Columbia College of Nurses and Midwives has issued an advisory notice warning the public about the dangers of unlicensed birth attendants, including those trained by FBS. In Alberta, a FBS-linked birth attendant was banned from hospitals unless she was seeking medical care for herself or her family. The company’s business model has also been criticized for being exploitative and misleading, with some women reporting that they were falsely advertised to and did not receive the level of care they expected.
Conclusion
The Free Birth Society’s radical views on birth have been criticized for being dangerous and irresponsible. The company’s business model has been criticized for being misleading and exploitative, with some women reporting that they were falsely advertised to and did not receive the level of care they expected. The regulatory environment surrounding FBS and its affiliates is complex and varied, with some health authorities warning the public about the dangers of unlicensed birth attendants. As the company continues to promote its extreme version of free birth, it is essential that women are aware of the risks and dangers associated with this approach, and that they seek medical care during pregnancy and childbirth.
