Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Childbirth

Share experiences and get support around labour, birth and recovery.

Original poster

Do women feel as if they're being told 'you shouldn't have a section'???

278 replies

tiktok · 27/04/2004 09:57

Various organisations, including NCT, campaign for choice of place of birth and type of birth, and point to the rising caesarean section rate with concern. This is because the high numbers contrast with the likely figure of women and babies who need a section for medical reasons. It also reflects concern that on the whole, recovery after a section can be longer and more difficult. I don't think this is the equivalent of telling individual women they shouldn't have sections (clearly, the op is life saving for some, anyway), but this is how it seems to be interpreted. Comments?

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Set a reminder
twogorgeousboys · 27/04/2004 22:29

Nightowl, you said you've felt a failure about demanding your second c section. It sound to me like you did absolutely the right thing. You mentioned the hospital wanted to put you on a drip to speed things along with the labour. This is a really big no no if a woman has had a previous c section. It has now been proven that drugs used to stimulate labour in women with previous c sections can lead to uterine rupture - almost certain death for the baby and a very ill mother. You were spot on in your instincts in my view.

I believe it is simply no longer allowed to induce or stimulate labour where c section has previously taken place because of the dangers involved. I do hope I'm right and its not another "depends on the hospital's policy".

nightowl · 27/04/2004 21:15

apparently, some of the signs i was showing can point to rupture of the uterus, which i didnt know at the time and ok, it probably wasnt the case but no-one even thought to show any concern...i dont feel that i was well informed at all and wish i had read up on it beforehand...i dont trust my local hospital anyway. there has been some controversy in the past with regard to them and i was extremely scared of what might happen. Both of my births were a traumatic experience and it puts me off having another child somewhat.

Codswallop · 27/04/2004 21:14

well thats fair enough

LadyMuck · 27/04/2004 21:13

Our hospital has had a highish c/section rate (ealy 20s). I do have a consultant who is anti-intervention (eg lets women go to 43 weeks without induction), but he also ends up with a large number of high-risk cases, so is concerned with the stats (one of the joys of being seen in a teaching hospital is that the consultant explains everything to the students).

Coddy it was a serious answer to your question. Some hospitals will let you "elect" for a c/section if you've had a previous section, but it is not automatic. I know some people who have managed to elect for c/sections after particularly traumatic vaginal births - not sure whether those get classed as "medically necessary"...

Codswallop · 27/04/2004 21:05

btw my q was genuine

hmb · 27/04/2004 20:57

That is very interesting Ladymuck, about 'having' to go for a vbac. I was given a very clear choice for my second section. I was offered a trial of labout, and I declined. In the end events dictated that I would have to have a secrtion anyway, but I was never made to feel that I 'should' have tried for a vbac. I had no idea that hospitals differed in their policies that much.

LadyMuck · 27/04/2004 20:53

I guess the issue for me is whether women are to be allowed to make an informed choice in childbirth or whether there is another agenda. To what extent should cost be the main factor? If we're looking at the constraints on the NHS, then the shortage of midwives is the single biggest issue. This is why homebirths are not as readily available as women would like: 2 midwives cannot be spared for one woman whilst hospital units can have 3 women looked after by one midwife. Should we go back to managed birth (accelerating labour after 12 hours etc) just because it would cost less?

I doubt that that would be the case, and so I suspect that cost or NHS constraints aren't the real reason why there is an apparent prejudice against elective c/sections.

Coddy - don't know about whole of UK but local hospital definitely against. Women are expected to go for VBAC even with 25-30% going on to need emergency c/sections.

charlieplus3 · 27/04/2004 20:35

My sections were not through choice, i have displaced pelvic bones and everytime someone said 'i was too posh to push' i had to explain why as i was made to feel like i was taking the easy option.

hmb · 27/04/2004 20:33

I'd be interested to know how many elective sections are for convience alone. Not being snide, I am realy interested. My second c-section would have been through choice id ds hadn't not made it a medical necessity by being very large and a footling breach. I also had eclampsia so in the end the 'choice' was a medical one. But it was my second section, would that have been seen as a section for 'convenience' if I didn't have the medical reasons? At the time of surgery the surgion commented that I had made the right choice, as my first scar was very thin and could have ruptured very easily.

hercules · 27/04/2004 20:25

I dont know how I would have got through my first birth without an epidural. I would not have had a second child had it not been for epidurals, as it was I waited 8 years after having ds to have another. For me it wasnt a case of just forgetting about it once it was over. The birth experience makes me not want anymore and surely that is not a reason not to have more children. If I wasnt allowed an epidural then I would only have had dd if I knew I could have had a csection. Not becuase of any indignity but the pain.

LadyMuck · 27/04/2004 20:24

I know that no policy should be based on one example, but a dear friend of mine opted for a homebirth for her 2nd child. She did have a bit of a fight on her hands as she had had post-partum bleeding with dd1. But she found enough support amongst midwives etc, and was allowed to plan for a homebirth. Due to her location, they had to make arrangements in the event of needing to be transferred to hospital: helicopter was the only feasible option.

The only reason that my friend opted for a home birth was because she had no-one to look after dd1. Due to her location the 2 midwives would have both had to arrive together, so 1 would have been free to look after dd1.

bossykate · 27/04/2004 20:01

thanks, aloha but it is really my own fault, i've got the worst case of pregnancy brain ever, find i'm not reading things right quite often. despite miserable birth experience before, it was actually pregnancy i was dreading second time around. i really hate it.

highlander · 27/04/2004 19:58

Go on then gals.......try and talk me out of it

I'm an old (35) first time perggers woman and my birth choice is a CS. In researching MY birth CHOICE, I've been extrememly lucky that I found this web site very early in my pregnancy, backed up my friend's stories. As with everyone on this site, the stories were pretty much a mixed bag of vaginal/CS with good/bad experiences for both.
I guess I'm also lucky that, in my career as a scientist, I'm used to researching evidence for experiments and making choices. With this, I know there is the uncertainty and risk that no matter how well prepared and informed I am, things may not go to plan.

What I appreciate most about this site is not only the information available, but also the support if you're worried or are having a bad experience. Some days, I feel like I've got hundreds of friends to chat to

I'm bright enough to make my childbirth choice for me. It's not everyone's choice, but it's mine and it's an informed choice. I don't know why, but I feel deeply offended and insulted that someone comes on here and slags off my choice as 'unatural' or even 'dangerous'.

I thought this site was about support, lively discussion and information, not bitching and slagging.

Codswallop · 27/04/2004 19:40

can oyu really get these ont he nhs though or is this all urban myth?

If they pay for the convenience thats fine!

SoupDragon · 27/04/2004 19:40

hmb, I don't think anyone is arguaing against c-sections where there are sound medical/phychological reasons for one. It's the ones where it's for the convenience of it that I think people object to (maybe object isn't the right word. I'm sure you know what I mean!)

kiwisbird · 27/04/2004 19:37

As I have stated, I am not against c sections, they are of course an essential part of bringing babies home alive during a sometimesdangerous birth process, my only resevervation is that they are too easily obtained without proper counsel...
If it was the best for my baby and me then I would have a c section without hesitation.
I just wonder about the advisability about having a c section on a non medical basis
and re the breast reduction, its currently a 4 yr wait list where I am and I do not qualify as I am not mentally bothered enough... Try and apply that criteria to the c section
LOL

scoobysnax · 27/04/2004 19:26

I am pro-choice in birth as in most things, so I would let anyone have a c-section for any reason, including a whim. I would however strive for information to be freely available so that women can make well-informed choices.

Whether an elective c-section should be available on the NHS is another issue open for debate although I personally would be happy for this to be an option on the NHS.

I think that some women who were lucky enough to have had a good birth experience with managable pain find it easy to say that all women should grit their teeth and get on with a vaginal delivery. To which I would say that all women were not created equal in the giving birth stakes - some of us have much more trouble than others, and this should not be dismissed lightly.

hmb · 27/04/2004 17:54

And I had champers and stilton in bed the day after my section (emergency at 2.00am)

hmb · 27/04/2004 17:53

And sometimes sections are not only the best option but also the only one, if you want both mother and babe alive and well at the end. Each case has to be taken on its merits.

hmb · 27/04/2004 17:51

Breast reductions are sometimes done on the NHS for the exact reasons that you give. They are also done if there are compelling psychological reasons. The same is also true for other forms of plastic surgery.

kiwisbird · 27/04/2004 17:46

and aloha

I got champers and bacon sandwich at home afterwards
mmmmmmmmmm

No hard feelings, great discussion

kiwisbird · 27/04/2004 17:45

Ok... I want a breast reduction, they (the breasts... make my life hell... back pain which costs me a fortune in osteopaths...
Should I be able to toddle in and ask for one from my local hospital because it suits me..?
If I would prefer a medical procedure for a non medical reason then I would expect to pay for it myself...
And I fully intend to... The NHS is at breaking point without elective non medically essential procedures.
As the mother of a child (and a higher rate tax payer) with a complex genetic condition, I resent ill spent NHS money!
To this end I have paid out time and time again for private treatment because I can.
I actually hate myself for saying the above, I am NOT anti section, I am just anti anyone purporting them to be the best option!

aloha · 27/04/2004 17:44

One last thing - even though I think birth sounds nasty, brutish and far too long, even I can see the advantage in being in your own bed afterwards.

aloha · 27/04/2004 17:43

And I have to admit LadyMuck, I did permit myself a smile at LadyMuck being too posh too push (or not, of course!)

aloha · 27/04/2004 17:41

BK, I am sorry if it did sound as if I was challenging your experience. I do know what an awful time you had. I have a photographic recall of bad births, I'm afraid! And from Mumsnet I do also realise that there are women who even have sections without proper anaesthesia, which is unforgiveable.