Alicia I love this movie so much

GrimPrecise I'll tell you why so serious

Stellead Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Shaniqua Harvey The Business of Being Born (2008) Ricki Lake and Abby Epstein (Until the Violence Stops) Rating: 7/10 "The United States has the second worst newborn death rate in the developed world" (The Business of Being Born). As a first time mother, this statistic was very frightening. I wanted to understand the reasoning and methods behind this unnerving statistic. This documentary was recommended by a peer and I was not sure what to expect of it, I thought that it would take a look at a few deliveries. But what I received from this documentary was greater than watching a normal birth. I received perspectives, answers and confirmation. Honestly, this documentary sheds light on one perspective and that is natural birthing, it does not look into other methods except to confirm the natural method. The film makers tried to compare the births that take place in a hospital setting and the ones that take place at home. The main focus was the home birth, but I honestly felt like this narrowed perspective allowed me to take the information and process it on my own. As viewers we are shown the processes of a natural birth, and then shown the processes of women who wanted natural births but for one reason or another could not. The main difference that I noted was female choice, which I believe to be the overall message of this documentary. In the hospital female choice was mostly dictated by doctor decision without understanding the rationale behind those decisions. While at home, the decisions appeared to be dictated by the mother; in fact the expectant mothers seemed to be laboring basically on their own without any mediation. Obviously in society with our new focus of going natural, there is going to be aims to support it for every aspect of life. This film supports the natural method of birthing whether at home or in a birthing center. If one is not curious or into the natural method, for a first time mother as myself it allows you to see several birth perspectives. This film can be informative from either perspective if you do not know what to expect for your first birth. It asks mothers to do something that our society usually does not do and that is to question a doctors reasoning behind some decisions. I agree with the film makers when they say that when a doctor say's I think we should do this, we automatically agree because we believe it is in our best interest. The point from this is, sometimes it may be unnecessary. Birth is a natural process in the fact that your body knows how to create, carry and eventually deliver a baby and this documentary delves into that perspective. Baby ratio is 64 born to every 1,000 women, so this is a topic that is very common and profound in our society and very relatable since everyone knows or knew someone who was pregnant at one point. The film makers use personal interviews of themselves, their patients, doctors, and experts to give us a view of the "problem" with deliveries in America. There is a span from child birthing from the 1900's to present time. One of the most appealing points in the film was the use of medicines during the birthing process and their later effects on children. With hospital staff we do see two different perspectives on home versus hospital birth, natural versus non-natural methods of birthing. Abby Epstein and Ricki Lake were both present during the entire film. Lake had an overwhelming presence on the film over Epstein. Majority of the camera shots were close-ups on the speakers at the time, or of the birthing process. Due to the one on one interviews the camera was always eye level on the speakers. The camera would also pan out, to give us a view of the room, birthing process or other speakers. The focus was deep; everything appeared clear and in focus. Some of the hospital scenes appeared to have a soft focus and that was to show the blur and rush of birthing and the birthing process in the hospital setting versus at home or at a birthing center. Editing techniques were mainly cross-cut, to quickly take us to the next scene. The film makers included archival photos and video of birthing over the course of history. Diegetic sound was used throughout the filming of this documentary. My perspective was very biased since I would like to birth naturally but in a hospital. I felt that this documentary helped me gain perspective on my voice and verbalizing my wants during delivery. I think even after watching this documentary I still want to birth in the hospital, I just feel I am more aware of my options. Now from the perspective of mothers that do not prefer natural birthing, I am not sure of the effectiveness of this documentary as a persuasive technique due to my bias. I would be interested in hearing the pros and cons from this perspective. The end of the film I found gave me the perspective due to the film maker Epstein going against the overall objective of the film and then her rationalization of her decision. This changed the perspective from the overlying message of natural home birth is best, to whatever birthing option the mom thinks is best for her!

nataliedoyon This documentary discusses a severely bias view of obstetrics and the medical side of birthing babies. While I don't completely disagree with some of the softer points made about the over-engineered process that takes place currently in North American Obstetrics wards, I found this film to be completely one-sided and quite presumptuous and almost cruel at some points.I must say that I was so turned-off by the incomplete, inequitable research done, that I turned the film off at one point. I felt a line was crossed when the film started to become so extreme as to say that c-section babies are not as loved by their mothers due to the lack of oxytocin that is released during the birthing process. Had the filmmakers chosen to dive into the lives of folks who had had c-section births, they would have found this to be a profoundly inaccurate and downright ignorant declaration. Perhaps my review of this film is biased, having given birth by c-section, and this caused me to be extremely offended by the film, for I felt that my love for my child was being debated.So while the film makes a few valid points regarding today's North American hospitals when it comes to labour and delivery, I would watch with a keen eye for insufficient research and unsupported arguments.

iamwinstonsmith1984 Like any good piece of propaganda, this movie starts by demonizing the OB/GYN profession (the enemy). The viewer is bombarded with images of early-20th century birthing practices as if they were still in use today. Having hospitals (and of course, insurance companies) set up as the "bad guy", the movie portrays the alternative (midwives) as the "natural" solution. Moreover, home delivery is portrayed as the only real choice for a woman to express her femininity and individual power.A few hand-picked critics of hospital births are chosen, who promptly spew out some convenient statistics in support of home delivery. Correlations (like infant mortality rates) are presented as causality without even discussing other potential factors. For example, the movie likes to recite the infant mortality rates in the US as being higher along with the higher rates of hospital vs. home births in other industrialized countries. However, at no time do these "experts" note factors like the relative experience levels of midwives in Europe vs. the US. Nor is a qualitative assessment provided that compares the level of care offered. Further, factors like miscarriages are not even discussed (if there are higher rates in Europe then these babies would not be reaching full term, thus diminishing infant mortality at birth), nor are other elements like obesity discussed (the US is the fattest nation of fatties in the world).One of the things that stood out to me was the frequent use of absolutes in their arguments: "There's no scientific evidence" to support hospital delivery as better than home deliver, etc. etc. Nothing even close to resembling counter-arguments were presented, making this documentary Michael Moore worthy in its biased presentation of its content.It's a shame something so delicate has been treated with such utter disregard for good science and disinterested research. The movie maker had a clear agenda and presented a completely one-sided argument. If you disagreed with home birth, you simply are a brainwashed fool ready to submit to fake doctors posing as OB/GYNs.Perhaps the most hilarious part of the movie came at the end, as the filmmaker went into labor one month early with a 3.5 lb baby who was in the breached position, umbilical cord wrapped tightly around its neck, as her water broke in a taxi cab as she was rushed to the ER. In spite of this, the filmmaker mused a month later "I think I would have been OK at home." Wow.

fwomp Informative? Sure. Gives a new perspective on a broken system? Definitely. Entertaining? Er ...not really.After talk-show host Ricki Lake experienced a bad childbirth in-hospital, she decided to try a midwife, and thus THE BUSINESS OF BEING BORN was ...um ...birthed. I can't help but think that some of this (not all) was a ploy by Lake to put herself back in the public eye; specifically, the movie industry. Although this is strictly a documentary, and other actors support various causes (from freeing Darfur to Tibetan independence), this one felt a bit more forced.The reason I say this is that the entire documentary was exceptionally boring and exceptionally lopsided. I work in the medical field (as an RN) but not in an Obstetrics setting. I can, however, vouch for the terrible cost of healthcare and some of the impersonalness of those giving it (as this documentary pointed out). I've heard doctors talking about "tee times" on the golf course and the need to "get home by dinner," so time is a big factor for physicians (the film pointed out that C-section deliveries peek at 4pm — just prior to dinnertime — and again at 10pm — so doctors can get home to bed). Be damned whether the patient needs a C-section or not, doctors force the decision so that they can "get on with their lives." Cut and run! Even with its interesting take on the care of OB/Gyn patients in the U.S., the film never delves outside of the States even though certain statistics are presented (including telling us that the infant mortality rate in the U.S. is one of the highest amongst developed countries). I would've liked to have seen at least one interview with a Japanese midwife or a European midwife, and have them show us how their system works. But we're never give the opportunity to see this for ourselves.The boring nature of the film is that it never really finds its focus. Although the title of it is The Business of Being Born, it focused more on the plight of midwives and their care of expectant mothers at home or in midwife clinics. We drive around with midwives, trot down the road with midwives, listen to midwives talk on the phone to patients, and get to watch a couple of in-home births. Then we start the entire process over again.And there's also a brief and confusing stint in which we learn one of the film's producers is pregnant and trying to decide on prenatal care.All-in-all it's an informative story, but one that might cause a few too many yawns.