Green Party pledge to reduce c section rates

'Always maternity where pain relief and medical care is painted as unneccessary isn’t it'

Exaaaactly. Perfectly put.

This is a horrible idea rooted in misogyny and nothing else. Apparently no one at the Green Party bothered to read the Ockendon Report.

I wonder if that's where the Greens are coming from. Given some of their other batshit policies have they bought into the 'too posh to push' narrative and think that they're hitting back at a privileged class without bothering about the reality of C sections?

It’s a bit of a shame because the Greens could have achieved something, but over the years they’ve turned into a party of absolute bampots.

@CoralQueef

But why? In every other field of medicine we celebrate the technological advancements and accept them. Why do women still want to give birth like cavewomen.

Thank you. I find it absolutely maddening that maternity is still seen with this sentimentalising and primitive lens: in no other area of medicine is there this belief that a potentially dangerous situation is enhanced by removing technology, reverting to atavistic ideas of some primitive Eden and telling women to expect an outdated standard of care.

As multiple people have rightly pointed out on here there’s no real evidence that “intervention” (and I hate that word - when did you last hear cancer medicine referred to an as intervention?) makes birth any more dangerous. The statistics that are trotted out are always without proper context and skewed to serve this primitivist agenda. Routine vaginal birth is indeed safer but many vaginal births are not safe.

And still women are patronised and subjected to substanndard care in the name of being “natural”.

The person who decides who gets a c section should be the mother if it’s pure choice and if it’s medically necessary to preserve life then the mother in conjunction with her medical team. I’d suggest someone who comes up with this shit spends 24hrs on the average maternity ward before deciding money can be saved by reducing women’s choices and pretending it’s some lifestyle choice Mother Earth bullshit. Maybe it’s a crappy way to reduce population by making it even more barbaric to give birth here than it already is.

Sorry but I find that hard to believe. That an obstetrician would wade in with forceps if recordings had returned to normal just because they’d been called in.

Something else worth remembering is that lots of women can be left with serious faecal incontinence issues if they deliver a large baby per vagina and tear. Just because it’s “natural” doesn’t mean it’s always better hence the higher rates of maternal and infant deaths in poorer countries.

Because sections are the easy way out apparently.

But why? In every other field of medicine we celebrate the technological advancements and accept them. Why do women still want to give birth like cavewomen.

because the system is so poorly staffed and funded. The priority should be on improving this drastically, to give women the confidence to give birth safely without intervention, in most cases.

They’ve completely lost the plot. As someone mentioned up thread - now that “being green” is on mainstream agendas, they’ve got to come up with something else. Bunch of crack pots really.

@Mustreadabook I think you've hit the nail on the head with why it's so difficult to get accurate and contextual information because there are so many other factors. One of my close friends had an assisted delivery and months later was still having follow up care due to it. An on call doctor had been rushed to her labour due to baby in distress but it turned out the monitor had just slipped and babys recordings were fine when it was adjusted. The doctor was basically like well I'm here anyway and went ahead with forceps. Totally unnecessary and you do need to question how often these things are happening. She never reported it as her and her baby were effectively safe and well but it stuck with her. I think there's more unnecessary intervention than needed and I also think a lot of that is linked to induction.

Vaginal deliveries are also not without risk. You are more likely to have a vaginal delivery with interventions than not. Therefore statistically women are better off having an elective section

Concerns about high CS rates are justified, because such a surgical procedure is not without risk. Serious complications such as infection, thrombosis, postpartum haemorrhage and increased risk in subsequent pregnancies may occur [4]. The World Health Organization states that there is no justification for a CS rate higher than 10%–15%.

…..Yeah let’s empower women by telling them how they should be empowered….

But you just can't compare the 1900s with modern technology and modern facilities, qualified midwifes, etc. This is just from the sublime to the ridiculous.

C-sections are true life savers, for both mum and baby. I had one for our first, after long labour, due to breech position, and I am so grateful we were both saved. And then two 'normal' deliveries, safely, for the next two.

Staffing and conditions should be really improved, and C-sections be reserved for medical conditions, not elective for all. Do we really want to have rates increasing all the time, 60, 70, 80 % for no medical reasons?

What a surprise that a trans-activist political party makes a statement like this that evidences its total lack of understanding of women's needs.

This is weirdly specific. Pledge a management and spending review of the NHS, ok, if it’s going to improve it but do not politicise specific medical interventions in this way, that is completely inappropriate.

Even when I had a vbac discussions appt it was mainly about c section risks. I had found online there was a 10% chance of a third degree tear with a vbac. That wasn’t mentioned!

How dare they.

Not everyone wants an ‘all natural, under a tree’ labour. I didn’t - I made it extremely clear I wanted an epidural as early as possible in both labours and this was ignored, as ‘you’re progressing so quickly hang on a moment and you might not need it’. For hours after that I was thrashing around screaming and the birth was NOT a thing of natural beauty, frankly I’m a bit scarred by my second one.

Always maternity where pain relief and medical care is painted as unneccessary isn’t it

It's back to lavender water and a strap to bite down on for the none-men. Try not to kick the bucket and weaponise your tears.

Child free woman here.
Why are they far from the norm?
I think something similar to a C section used to be performed by old Egyptians, in order to save mum and kid.
How odd a comment.

Fucking hell, the Green Party really hates women, doesn’t it? They don’t even seem to give much of a shit about ecology - their main focus seems to be wanting men to have access to women’s spaces and rabid trans activism.

It’s a travesty. We need a party which is focused on positive movement towards societal change in terms of the environment. Greens are a misogynistic shitshow.

I think they label it as expensive rather than risky

Have you read the article you link to? It says they are reviewing that policy not that they're bringing it in.

If we look at it from a safety point of view for mothers and babies surely intervention and surgery rates will rise during childbirth due to maternal age being higher and more maternal risk factors such as obesity. You cant dial that back to some fantasy where everyone giving birth is a healthy 25 year old. This policy does and will put women and babies at risk.