I don't understand why people (that means Dana) have to be so insistent that everyone be objective. I haven't seen the "The Business of Being Born" and I probably won't (I'm worried about flashbacks to weave wars). But I do understand that it is a movie designed to advocate for a certain point of view. That is the the point of view that sees hospital births as unnecessarily sterile productions put on for the conveneince and comfort of a paternalist male dominated medical establishment. They believe that births should be a a primal experience defined by maternal instincts. Why should they be objective? There are plenty of people arguing the other side. This insistence that both sides of the isssue be presented is silly and a chimera. Most of the times when documentary film makers (read Michael Moore) present the other side it is simply to set up a straw man. Finally I have read statistics saying that Midwife attended births at home are much safer than hospital births. So I wonder if Dana would be so kind to source his facts then maybe I'll feel obliged to source mine.