Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Childbirth rights- are you pro-choice?

93 replies

Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 18:30

I am sure majority of the ladies who post on the women's rights forum are pro-choice, and support a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy.

My question is more about the woman's rights when she chooses to continue with the pregnancy. Should she have full control over how she gives birth?

I'm not talking about outrageous requests like demanding that a doctor perform IVF and get you pregnant with sextuplets or that a doctor perform an appendectomy or chop off a limb during pregnancy just because the woman wants it.

However, childbirth is a slightly different situation because the baby will come out somehow and I feel liken the woman should have a voice in how and where that happens. It is also quite common for doctors to be biased towards fetal rights and override what the woman feels more comfortable with.

So I am therefore referring to a woman's right to choose how she should give birth, as I happen to think this is a feminist issue.

Do you think women should be able to choose the following (as long as they are fully informed about the pros and cons)?

A home birth?

An elective cesarean?

An epidural?

An elective induction?

Or do you think that a doctor should be able to force a woman to give birth in a way that she doesn't feel comfortable?

Despite the NICE guidelines saying that it is ultimately the woman's choice if she wants an elective cesarean or a home birth, women are still having to fight for these unconventional choices.

Just as it can be disempowering to be forced to stay pregnant against your will, it can also be disempowering to give birth in a way that you don't want

OP posts:
Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 21:53

Yes, I do understand that resources aren't limitless. If they were, we would all give birth in jacuzzis with mood lighting and champagne afterwards. Wine Grin

Alas! This is not the case.

The way I look at it, most women who give birth on the NHS have paid decent money into that system for a good number of years. It is highly unreasonable to deny them some form of treatment because it costs some £800 more.

OP posts:
scottishmummy · 23/05/2013 21:49

your language is loaded,emotive,you're globally critical of professionals
you're trying to make me answer I question that I didn't pose
don't try to digress into a topic I wasn't addressing

Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 21:46

scottishmummy I am not advocating limitless choice Hmm

I am advocating very basic simple decisions that women should be allowed to make on their own, such as a repeat cesarean v/s a VBAC or a home birth v/s a hospital birth. I don't think this is unreasonable at all.

Do you actually condone doctors being able to force women to have VBACs or doctors being able to deny tokophobic women cesareans?

OP posts:
Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 21:44

Salbertina I disagree. It is human nature for personal bias to enter such decisions. If I am making an informed choice to have a VBAC, but my provider is against them (as many of them are) because he places maximum importance on the risks of uterine rupture then is it fair for me to be denied my choice?

My doctor may think the worst possible risk is an infection and I may think it's a fourth degree tear. I'll request a cesarean till I'm blue in the face and he'll continue to refuse because he sees things differently.

It isn't always about absolute risk, it is often about different perceptions.

I cannot condone women being forced to give birth in ways that they aren't comfortable with.

This is as bad as a doctor refusing a woman an abortion because he/she feels that it is immoral.

OP posts:
AmandaPayneNeedsANap · 23/05/2013 21:43

Bunny - I honestly don't know if the ever NHS 'forces' a woman to VBAC. But a VBAC is very different to all the other things you have mentioned in your post because it's the default. If the hospital does nothing, a VBAC is what will happen. That isn't the case with a sweep or an induction. I certainly do know of women who have been 'forced' to do without epidural - because if the anaesthetist simply doesn't show up, you give birth without. If all that happens is that, every time you ask, and your birth partner asks, they say she's in theatre and she'll be there soon, that's what happens.

Also, I agreed to things in labour I would never have agreed to in normal life. I hadn't slept in more than 48 hours before we even arrived at the hospital, and basically neither had my husband. We were in no position to resist 'pressure'. Pressure was almost entirely equivalent to forcing, and I suspect that's an issue for many labouring women.

scottishmummy · 23/05/2013 21:41

you're language is v loaded and frankly anti-professional.
pragmatically clinicians manage risk and work with mums to collaborate on outcome
resources aren't limitless, nor are choices.there is no absolute wish list

Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 21:40

Bunnylion Viva (who is an NHS midwife) has just stated herself on this very thread that women are being forced into VBACs.

My own sister was denied an elective cesarean despite having suffered a fourth degree tear during her previous birth.

I've read quite a few threads on mumsnet about women with tokophobia being denied cesareans and/or epidurals by the NHS.

So I can assure you that it is entirely possible for women to be denied choices on the NHS.

Saying no to procedures is generally less of an issue, because patients have unlimited 'negative' rights.

"The problem - as I see it - is the empowerment of women during their pregnancy and labour to actually question and speak against any standard protocol."

Completely agree! I think the empowerment is happening. The voices are being raised, but they are not being heard.

OP posts:
Salbertina · 23/05/2013 21:36

Clinical risk must always be paramount and then the wants of the woman. Clinicians have to be the final arbiter on this for obvious reasons so there have to be limits to individual choice.

Bunnylion · 23/05/2013 21:32

feminist5 thank you.

I honestly don't think the NHS ever "forces" a VBAC or anything else on a woman. A doctor may well say that they very strongly recommend it but if the woman still says no then that is actually tantamount to assault if anyone goes against her wishes.

Pressuring is different to forcing.

Pressure obviously isn't nice but as long as the woman is informed, empowered and has a good midwife and birth partner with her then the hospital has to respect her wishes.

I do agree that procedures and protocol are followed and often consent is speedily asked and presumed throughout a labour, but a woman can clearly say no to any of them. I read a lot of women over on the pregnancy section saying they've been booked in for an induction/sweep etc and don't want it, but they don't seem to realise that they can just say no thank you and instead have the hospital monitor the baby and and wait if they have gone past due date.

The problem - as I see it - is the empowerment of women during their pregnancy and labour to actually question and speak against any standard protocol.

AmandaPayneNeedsANap · 23/05/2013 21:31

I would support all of them bar induction on demand.

Starting with the most black and white, it is barbaric that any woman be denied pain relief they request (whilst recognising that they might have to wait for anaesthetist).

Home birth/elective section/VBAC, these matters should be totally the choice of the woman. I do think that there are caveats - like ensuring that decisions on elective section are fully informed, and ensuring that the availability of that choice doesn't lead towards women being pushed that route rather than issues like counselling for birth phobia if that is what the woman would prefer.

Induction. That one is more difficult for me. On balance I think not. Just like the decision to prescribe a particular drug (for an illness) ultimately lies with the clinician, I think induction should be ultimately a clinical decision, even though I think that the views of the woman should be taken into account and added to the equation. This includes those views being given due weight.

What I struggle to articulate is why, at an intellectual level, I think induction is different from, say elective section, where the clinician's view might differ from the woman's. I think that ultimately it's about degree. Section, etc are about the fundamental mechanisms of giving birth, and in those I think a woman's views should be paramount. I'll keep thinking on that last bit.

Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 21:31

Salbertina I am sorry that that is the impression you have! I have nothing against doctors or midwives. I do feel however that they shouldn't be able to override a woman's informed choice about her own birth (unless it's something ridiculous like an elective cesarean at 33 weeks because she wants to go to Ibiza).

I also happen to think that given the cost cutting measures being used by the NHS, they often don't have much of a say themselves.

OP posts:
Salbertina · 23/05/2013 21:15

@feminist- why are you so suspicious of doctors- people who have chosen to work in their demanding & competitive field and devoted years of study to that end? Quite ridiculous to presume they want the worst for their patients or just to " get out of trouble". Such reductive nonsense is the type of thing the NCT has been known to advocate in its classes (certainly in mine!) which does it a great disservice....

Far better to partner WiTH rather than against clinicians to bring about safe, sustainable change with women's interests paramount

Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 21:07

From my understanding, according to both the RCOG and the ACOG, women are less likely to have a PPH after a planned cesarean than after a vaginal birth. So I am not sure why a doctor would counsel a woman about the higher risk of PPH after a repeat cesarean, unless they were following outdated research.

Furthermore, while future pregnancies are definitely a concern, they aren't even applicable to everyone. If someone only wants two children and she has already had one by cesarean then it's a bit silly to force her into a VBAC for fear of what will happen to future pregnancies...

OP posts:
Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 21:04

Well, saying that women are two times more likely to die after a cesarean is equally misleading because even that is statistically a very small risk. I know that the overall risks are small, but risks are still risks and nobody can guarantee that the woman being forced into a procedure won't be the one to have that complication.

Forcing someone to have a repeat cesarean is as unfair as forcing someone to have a VBAC. I disagree with both policies.

OP posts:
VivaLeBeaver · 23/05/2013 21:01

And when the Drs are counselling women about vbac they are definitly saying that vbac is the safer option. But like you say, it's different risks and the woman may not be as bothered about some of the section risks such as infection, etc.

But the dr may well be thinking about the higher incidence of haemorrhage at a section compared to a vbac. Also they may consider possible future pregnancies more. If you have two sections and then want a third then the section can be more difficult, more risk of things like placenta accreta.

VivaLeBeaver · 23/05/2013 20:59

Saying vbac has a 4 times higher perinatal morality rate is slightly misleading. That figure is 4x a very small number, so the actual risk still isn't very high.

Afaik, newer research is increasingly finding vbac to be safer than first thought. Women used to have to fight for vbac and now its gone full circle. They now think risk of uterine rupture is more like 0.5%, mad that risk is the same even for two previous sections! However where I work if you've had two sections you're not "allowed" a vbac even though its as safe as a vbac after one section.

Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 20:54

Oh you're a midwife! Nice :)

I wish NHS trusts would just tell women to pay the extra money for a repeat cesarean then instead of forcing them to do something with their bodies that they don't want. Denying the choice altogether is so outrageous.

OP posts:
VivaLeBeaver · 23/05/2013 20:50

bears, I agree. I see some women having inductions for reasons such as severe spd and I can totally see the need for such inductions. Glad yours worked out well.

As a midwife I always try and remember that I'm there as an advocate for women. So I will support them and fight their corner even if personally I disagree with what they want. Unless its wanting a section at 33 weeks because they want to go on holiday to Ibiza. Grin

Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 20:49

A section at 40 weeks is riskier than a VBAC? Hmm

Isn't a VBAC associated with 4 times higher perinatal mortality and a 1-2% risks of uterine rupture? I'm not saying it's a bad option, I am just saying that the risks associated are severe enough that they can't be forced on anyone.

The risks of a planned cesarean are mainly for the mother and as an adult she can decide herself if she is prepared to take them.

OP posts:
VivaLeBeaver · 23/05/2013 20:47

Feminist, I've sent a pm.

Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 20:47

Viva I have no doubt that the doctor will find a way out of trouble even if the VBAC ends up with disastrous results. They usually always have an excuse.

I'd advise all women to insist (prior to consenting to this forced VBAC) that the hospital sign on a piece of paper which states that she will not suffer a uterine rupture and that if she did, they would take responsibility for the risks involved. It should also go on record that the woman did not consent to the VBAC and was concerned about a uterine rupture.

There will always be a debate about which childbirth option is safer, even amongst obstetricians. Two doctors might have a different opinion on the same case. That is why it has to be the woman who ultimately says what is best for her.

You can argue that a section is riskier based on your perception of risks, but I may find a VBAC worse. Since either way I will be the one to ultimately bear the brunt of whatever happens, shouldn't I get to decide?

OP posts:
BearsInMotion · 23/05/2013 20:45

Even inductions aren't black and white. I was fed up of being pregnant. I'm disabled and pregnancy exacerbated my condition. Also no-one knew whether I'd be able to manage labour, and one suggestion was an induction alongside epidural was the best chance of a vaginal delivery. So we discussed the options, and that was what I decided. Worked out perfectly :)

VivaLeBeaver · 23/05/2013 20:43

Sorry, last message was in rely to teitura.

VivaLeBeaver · 23/05/2013 20:43

To some extent, yes. Which is why I said that been able to demand an induction or section at 33 weeks would be very silly and should never happen.

But if its something fairly straightforward such as vbac vs section at 40 weeks.....then the Dr could argue that the section is slightly riskier. But the mum would be right in saying there's a small risk of uterine rupture which perhaps she isn't prepared to take.

Feminist5 · 23/05/2013 20:40

I am not fully convinced. Firstly, a cesarean costs £800 more, not 3k.

Secondly, maternity is a women's rights issue. Men do not have to give birth, nor do they have to go through any such major life event which can change their body and impact their health for the rest of their lives.

If this was a dental treatment or a stomach bug and they wanted to use the cheaper option, I wouldn't care. Pregnancy and childbirth is not a trivial matter and treating it as though it was, is misogynistic.

If the NHS want to cut costs then there are plenty of other areas they should look at first instead of making maternity their favourite choice for cost cutting.

The VBAC only decision is so unfair that it has me shaking with anger. It is also illogical- even one VBAC gone wrong can end up costing the NHS trust millions in damage control.

Do you mind telling me which trust this is? (You can PM me if you don't want to reveal it on here).

OP posts: