Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think elective repeat caesarian is a valid choice?

522 replies

schmee · 01/03/2011 17:58

I'm currently pregnant with DC3 and would like to have a repeat c-section. I had a planned c-section last time as had twins, one of whom was breach. I haven't seen the consultant yet, so I don't know if I'll be allowed one on the NHS but I hope so.

I remember last time round people saying "oooh I don't blame you if you're having twins" when I said I was booked into for a section. I really don't understand what "blame" has to do with it, particularly as the decision was made to safeguard the health of my twins. This time round if I say my preference is for a repeat c-section the response is even worse, with people from frenemies to strangers feeling able to question my choice and try to get me to reconsider. WHY?

I wondered if people here think repeat c-section is a valid choice. And whether anyone's mind about planned sections had been changed by watching One Born last night which showed what a calm and baby-focussed scenario a scheduled section can be.

OP posts:
rinabean · 01/03/2011 18:21

Even if it were more dangerous for the baby, what does that matter? It's not like 1 in 10 babies die due to sections or something. It's like the difference between using a car or not. Or maybe all pregnant women should change their house to all electric instead of gas because omg what if there's an explosion DON'T YOU LOVE YOUR BABY?! Living is dangerous! Plenty die from it! This exactly the kind of thing I meant, that pregnant women are just incubators for the precious, precious baby.

There's nothing else that people are expected to do the painful old-fashioned way when we have a civilised alternative. There's nothing else men never have to do.

For what it's worth, I'm crunchy as hell, but that doesn't mean everyone has to be.

BooyFuckingHoo · 01/03/2011 18:21

"in my hospital they never refuse a woman who has had a previous section. I think its that way across the board, but I might be wrong."

no it isn't the case across the board. my mum is theatre sister and they set the limit at 3 for planned sections. 4 would be rare.

tinierclanger · 01/03/2011 18:22

Yanbu. It's a perfectly valid choice.

TattyDevine · 01/03/2011 18:23

Who wants to be cut open seriously?

Me. I had an elective c-section. It was wonderful.

Whats wrong with giving birth naturally?
I dont know, I've never done it. But I'm glad, having heard some of the stories on here.

Or is it can't be arsed with the labour pains?
No idea, never experienced one.

expatinscotland · 01/03/2011 18:23

'I dont think a c section should be an option as a choice, I don't believe women should be able to choose to have one. Surely the only time women have a c section is if it is needed for medical reasons.'

So you think women should be forced to reproduce how others see fit?

Okay Hmm

bulby · 01/03/2011 18:23

It is not a similar argument to breast v bottle in my opinion and I actually do think it is other peoples business. I have no issue at all about cs for health reasons but when it it costs so muchore for the nhs to pay for people who simply would prefer one then I'm sorry but I cannot see how it can be justified.

Vallhala · 01/03/2011 18:23

FabbyChic, it's a bit more than can't be arsed and I find that attitude offensive tbh.

My elder child is nearly 16 years old.

To this day I can honestly tell you that had the hospital staff been able to kill either or both of us to rid me of the pain of a very fast, ventouse delivery without any pain relief I would have accepted it. The fear and distress of it brings me close to tears even now.

Never, ever again would I have gone through that.

Original poster
schmee · 01/03/2011 18:23

tabulahrasa absolutely it's not clear that one is better for mother and baby. Actually as other posters have said c-sections are generally safer for the baby - the mother is taking more of the risks onto herself.

I guess it's misinformation and misunderstanding like yours and Darlene's that cause people to feel they can judge?

OP posts:
TattyDevine · 01/03/2011 18:24

"No it isn't the case across the board. my mum is theatre sister and they set the limit at 3 for planned sections. 4 would be rare"

Do you mean for one woman?

What do they do for a woman pregnant with her 5th child, then? Make her attempt a VBAC? Shock

Are you sure?

Rangirl · 01/03/2011 18:26

I had 2 CS after my first child was still born Someone once said to me they would feel cheated by having children without the 'birth experience' Try having the 'birth experience'without the baby YANBU Ignore all comments,your body,your baby your shout Hope all goes well

BooyFuckingHoo · 01/03/2011 18:27

well it isn't as black and white as that tatty. each case is looked at on an individual basis. if there are no indicators that a VBAC would be pose more risk than a 4th or 5th planned section then the section will not be booked. of course if teh need arises later in the pregnancy or during labour then they will section.

tabulahrasa · 01/03/2011 18:29

"CS is slightly less risk for the baby regardless"

that's not what I've read, there was a study a few years ago that showed an infant mortality rate in elective sections about two or three times that of vbac

Alibabaandthe40nappies · 01/03/2011 18:30

YANBU.

I don't think it is anything like the FF/BF debate. There are no long term health risks for a baby born by c-section.....

nancydrewfoundaclue · 01/03/2011 18:31

boofuckinghoo

Out of interest does that mean after 3 sections Drs advise no more babies or do they recommend VBAC over 4th section? I would have thought that was far more risky (not that I have any knowledge regarding this whatsoever Grin)

Alibabaandthe40nappies · 01/03/2011 18:31

tabulah - you have to take into account that many of those ELCS will be from pregnancies considered too high risk to attempt a VBAC, so you cannot draw anything from that.

aPixieMomma · 01/03/2011 18:31

I also don't think it should be a choice unless there's a medical reason.

Everyone knows how child birth works and if they still want to get pregnant then they shouldn't be demanding a c sec "just because"

I actually asked for an elective c sec for the birth of my first child though, only realising after I was pregnant that not one single member of my family as far back as we can remember has been able to give birth naturally. The hospital said NO and I've been the first person ^^ to have 2 great natural births.

nancydrewfoundaclue · 01/03/2011 18:32

X posts with tatty there.

BooyFuckingHoo · 01/03/2011 18:32

not sure at all nancy what a doc would advise. as i said mum is the theatre sister, so i don't know every aspect of the practise.

meliesmummy · 01/03/2011 18:33

Those of you who think a vbac is safer please read the NICE guidelines online, bcos its not

Nataby · 01/03/2011 18:35

Totally agree, in my opinion, it's a valid and much more sensible way of birthing.

TattyDevine · 01/03/2011 18:35

Yes, whilst the risk of your baby dying is, thankfully, very very low, it is still higher with a VBAC than an elective section.

The chance of YOU dying is greater with elective section. Once again, still very very low.

tinierclanger · 01/03/2011 18:36

There are many reasons why a woman might want a c section. Childbirth is one tiny part of actually raising a child. It's ridiculously smug to say you just shouldn't get pregnant if you can't face the idea of labour.

I didn't have a c section and still managed to reasonably enjoy my (heavily medicalised) labour , so I have no axe to grind.

Procrastinating · 01/03/2011 18:40

I have had 3 CS, 2 were elective. Each time I was advised by my consultant to have an ECS because it was safer for the baby due to risks of rupture from previous CS.
I completely agree with your decision Schmee.

tabulahrasa · 01/03/2011 18:41

www.medicineonline.com/news/12/6008/High-infant-mortality-seen-with-elective-c-section.html

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-536X.2006.00102.x/abstract

nope, it was for mothers with no indicated risks, sections by maternal request not medical necessity

aPixieMomma · 01/03/2011 18:42

And how is it smug?

You don't get pregnant thinking great I'll just demand a c-section because I don't want to have a natural birth for the reason I just don't want to! What happens when your demand is turned down? You don't have a choice then and it's not like you would terminate the baby just because you haven't been granted what you wanted.

Like I said, c-sections should be for medical reasons only. I didn't specify what medical problems. If the thought of childbirth affects you in a really bad way psychologically then I would still class that as a medical reason. And many other reasons.

Demanding one because it's convenient (although I don't see how) or because you can't be bothered to or because it'll hurt (duh) shouldn't be allowed.