The Swedish women's choice of birthplace : Can Sweden offer similar financed birthplace benefits as in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands?

At the beginning of the 20th century, major technological changes occurred in maternity care in Europe. In connection with the introduction of good hand hygiene, advance medical equipment and use of disinfectants in the hospitals, obstetricians quickly noticed that maternal mortality decreased. This together with the rest of the medical equipment made hospital births safer. The hospitals became more attractive birth places instead of the homes. While the development from homebirth to hospital delivery went fast in Sweden, the midwives who worked in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands kept their role as primary caregiver to pregnant women by opening birth centers (freestanding clinics normally staffed by midwives offering a homely environment) and continued offering assistance with births at home, if that was the wish of the mother. Today, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands are good examples of a maternity care system with free choice where to give birth and with high patient safety. The purpose of this work is to see if Sweden can offer freedom of choice within the maternity care in accordance with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and applicable legislation. This is done by evaluating as to how maternity care is financed and the midwives’ role in the countries like the Netherlands and the United Kingdom and compared with Sweden. Today, maternity care in Sweden is severely criticized, not least by healthcare staff due to poor working environment. Pregnant women feel an uncertainty before childbirth, which has led to the government and Swedish municipalities and county councils to decide to make a major effort to improve maternity care and women's health. Within the framework of the development of the healthcare, this work suggests that a review of the freedom of choice in childbirth care would be a natural part to include in the reform