Talk

Advanced search

To think seven Caesareans in eight years is a recipe for disaster?

(428 Posts)
ElizabethG81 Sun 29-May-16 21:04:25

What's happened to this woman is horrific, but surely having so many Caesareans in such a short period of time is recklessness bordering on insanity? www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3615027/Mother-eight-relives-nightmare-waking-C-section-discover-legs-amputated.html

Pettywoman Sun 29-May-16 21:40:53

I thought they tied your tubes after 4. They did that to my friend. They do tell you it's dangerous to have more than 3.

RaspberryOverload Sun 29-May-16 21:42:57

But consent would be needed to tie your tubes, wouldn't it? So doctors could recommend it, but couldn't enforce it.

But 7 CS in 8 years, definitely daft.

TaliZorahVasNormandy Sun 29-May-16 21:44:17

I felt wrecked after one section, never mind 7. That is just dangerous.

Notcontent Sun 29-May-16 21:45:10

I always thought that the general rule is that you should not have more than three.

Hodooooooooor Sun 29-May-16 21:45:34

You thought they tied your tubes after 4? confused please tell me that's a joke....

uglyflowers Sun 29-May-16 21:47:06

Gosh what a terrible story. Poor woman. I guess, though, this could happen to anyone who'd had a section ( and I say that as someone who has had two including an elective).

fuctifino Sun 29-May-16 21:47:53

7 does seem rather excessive but I would never have thought the result would be losing your legs.

FuzzyOwl Sun 29-May-16 21:49:27

Certainly risks increase after three (and I don't think you are allowed a VBAC after your third section) but I also don't think a safe number has been established - probably because it all depends on how well you have healed and how long it has been between births.

SouperSal Sun 29-May-16 21:49:30

Hasn't that woman with 18 or whatever kids had about 12 c sections?

OTheHugeManatee Sun 29-May-16 21:49:36

Surely after having had six ELCS already she had been told of the risks associated with doing it repeatedly? I think what has happened is awful but she bears some of the responsibility.

Kpo58 Sun 29-May-16 21:50:02

It was irresponsible of her to have that many caesareans.

I'd also be interested on how they can financially support that many children (even before the last baby) without sponging off the state.

RubbleBubble00 Sun 29-May-16 21:50:32

There's a general rule that doctors recommend no more than 4 sections and some doctors strongly suggest sterilisation during 4th section. You can have more sections but the risks increase enormously

BeYourselfUnlessUCanBeAUnicorn Sun 29-May-16 21:50:58

I know someone who has had 4 sections but generally only 3 is advised isn't it? That article states the risks with multiple sections. It's irresponsible to keep having children when you know you have to have a risky section to give birth.

ElizabethG81 Sun 29-May-16 21:51:00

They obviously don't enforce it, Hodoooor, but it's recommended after 3/4.

StarUtopia Sun 29-May-16 21:51:05

I'm amazed they let her have so many sections. Why couldn't she just have natural births (much safer)

I was a trainwreck after my c section - which was planned (long long story). If I ever got pg again, you would hear me begging to be allowed to try for another natural birth.

All in all, I think there's more about this story than is being disclosed!

SouperSal Sun 29-May-16 21:51:15

I don't think you are allowed a VBAC after your third section

How would they stop you?

ElizabethG81 Sun 29-May-16 21:51:51

I was also told to wait at least a year to get pregnant again after my C-section. This woman has had one nearly every year for 8 years.

Northernlurker Sun 29-May-16 21:52:02

It sounds like the hospital may have admitted some failure in post op care which doubtless will cause a hefty compensation bill but the true cause of the situation is her proceeding with pregnancy after pregnancy in dangerous circumstances. She's lucky she didn't bleed to death.

eightbluebirds Sun 29-May-16 21:52:14

Terribly sad for her but I can't see how the NHS is at fault here. All those C sections aren't God for anyone. Somewhat baffled at how she claims the doctors didn't check on her hourly as they should have, despite the fact she was in a coma at that time.

OTheHugeManatee Sun 29-May-16 21:52:38

I get the impression this woman ignored all the risks, expected the NHS to protect her regardless of how stupid her decisions and now wants to blame them for the consequences.

Floggingmolly Sun 29-May-16 21:52:58

Horrible thing to happen; but she was made aware of the (considerable) risks and kept going anyway. But of course they've taken legal action - it's always someone else's fault, isn't it? hmm

maggiethemagpie Sun 29-May-16 21:53:50

Presumably any checks would be in her medical notes ?

HungryHorace Sun 29-May-16 21:54:24

I wouldn't want that many kids if I had to have a c section each time. I've had two, an EMCS followed by an ELCS, and I really don't fancy another one. Or a VBAC. That'll be us stopping at 2 then. :-)

I don't recall being warned about clotting particularly, though it's clearly a risk as you get clexane injections afterwards. Scary that you could wake up after what you think is from giving birth only to be told you've lost your legs. That's got to have a massive psychological impact.

PurpleRainDiamondsandPearls Sun 29-May-16 21:56:43

She's taking legal action but she must have been told the risks.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now