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

[ElizabethG81]

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

Well presumably, if the checks weren't ordered then the hospital won't be found at fault then will they.

if in fact it turns out that a dr gave orders which were ignored and/or family raised concerns which weren't investigated or acted upon then she has a case doesn't she?

haemorrhage and blood transfusions in birth and the need fir emergency hysterectomy could happen to anyone.

maybe multiple sections is increasing the risk but so would things like smoking and drinking and probably underlying illnesses and we still have to treat those people regardless orlf whether or not something o's deemed self inflicted or not.

their job is to provide medical care based to everyone.

not rank via personal. opinions of lifestyle choices.

Suzietwo I have had four and the last one was a doddle. Best yet. Everyone's uterus holds up differently with each pregnancy and op. I was told in my last section that there's no reason from that side of things I couldn't have more - but obviously I'd be at high risk of accreta. Please try not to worry. There is a huge difference between four and seven and the gap between sections makes a huge difference. You're supposed to wait 18 months between sections. She has had seven back to back near enough.

Suzietwo I have had four and the last one was a doddle. Best yet. Everyone's uterus holds up differently with each pregnancy and op. I was told in my last section that there's no reason from that side of things I couldn't have more - but obviously I'd be at high risk of accreta. Please try not to worry. There is a huge difference between four and seven and the gap between sections makes a huge difference. You're supposed to wait 18 months between sections. She has had seven back to back near enough.

based on need.

And besides.

who's to say that the examinations and tests conducted didn't actually have her pegged at less risk than the mum. down the hall on her 2nd c section who is a bit overweight and used to smoke. ...

everyone heals differently.

everyone looks after themselves differently.

Thank you. I appreciate your post! I preferred my emergency sections to my elective.

"Obviously we don't know the reason for the previous sections "

Elective as her first birth had been difficult.

Some shocking comments on this thread

IF she received poor post-op care then of course she should raise a legal case. If her care was performed appropriately then she won't get anywhere anyway. This woman's life has been ruined.

This thread is absolutely disgusting. I'm shocked and appalled and have reported.

Being traumatised following her first birth is a good enough reason for choosing an elective if she wants. They wouldn't have done it on a whim, we don't know how badly she was affected after the first birth. That's her call and her business.

don't recall being warned about clotting particularly, though it's clearly a risk as you get clexane injections afterwards.

I think it's a risk with any surgery. I was woken up from surgery(not Caesarean) with DVR stockings on and given blood thinners in the following days.

Mumsnet have just sent a mass email (their words) to those that have reported this thread, so it sounds like their have been a lot of reports.

I notice the OP fucked off and has'nt returned.

there has not their have

Yes fragmin injections are standard now.

I think the drs were negligent not to give her an automatic hysterectomy given the medical history and perhaps she could have avoided the coma.
Its a shame she wasn't warned when choosing an elective for a second child that it could limit her family size.

"Obviously we don't know the reason for the previous sections "
Elective as her first birth had been difficult.

Its not relevant what her reasons were. Its not something you should have to 'justify'. EVER

However, if you are granted an ELCS for mental health or traumatic birth it should be stated that the number of children you intend to have should be discussed with you.

This isn't actually one of the key points on 'maternal request' CS (and I think the term is flawed as its grossly misleading) in the NICE guidelines. The statistics on risk in the NICE document are also slightly misleading as they are for first time mothers only, and the cavet about the risks increasing for subsequent pregnancies are definitely not stressed enough.

(This is one of the reasons why women over 35 tend to be 'allowed' ELCS more readily than younger women, which distorts the figures and feeds the 'too posh to push' nonsense. They are less likely to have more children because of their age and their age is an increased risk in the first place)

Its not mentioned often enough in threads on MN where women have had a traumatic birth. ELCS are readily suggested without also saying what else you should be aware of, so I do think there is either a lack of proper awareness or a cultural expectation (that seeps over to HCPs) that you will only have a certain number of children.

Having 8 children - by any method - is not the norm in the UK.

I can't believe the complete lack of empathy,

It's isn't about the c sections, that's a red herring, it's about her lack of follow up care, her legs were meant to be check every hour for clotting, she wasn't checked for 6 hours, when she was she was taken straight to surgery to try to save them. If they had checked hourly she my still have her legs.

Yes 7 C sections are dangerous and. She was reckless but that wasn't the cause.

mrgrouper, do try reading the thread. She will not have been warned of the risk of the hospital staff failing to do their job. And the benefit-bashing attempt reveals more about you than you perhaps realise.

Yes 7 C sections are dangerous and. She was reckless but that wasn't the cause.

I'd question whether she really knew that she was being reckless tbh.

Why, that might be the case, is open to debate.

Also her husband is a car mechanic, cannot see how he can afford 8 kids, must be a tax credits mega payout

What's that got to do with anything?

This is what the Daily Mail want you to comment on and froth about, rather than poor post natal care.

It means that the culture is to let failing hospitals off the hook by not meaning there isn't the public pressure to improve things.

Its not hard to get to the equation - women who have poor care deserve it - from that mentality.

Mrgrouper that's a pretty disgusting post tbh...so she doesn't deserve any empathy or adequate care? She has lost both her legs! Who cares how they pay for their kids?!

How many kids she has is nobody's business. It isn't wise to have so many by cs but the fact that she had so many children rather than surgeries isn't anyone else's business.

everyone is entitled to professional and adequate care.

be they a fire fighter, a mum on her 10th kid or the local serial killer.

it matters not what you are or what you have done or what anyone thinks.

everyone has the right to he treated. and everyone has the right to the proper standard of care.

I am entitled to my own opinion and dogpiling because I do not agree with you is pathetic and sad.
It is impossible to look after 8 kids properly. It is too many and it is selfish on the older siblings to keep going just because she wants it.
My sister in law did exactly this. She was warned a 9th pregnancy could kill her, but just carried on regardless, even though that risked leaving the other 8 children without a mother. Social services were involved as she was neglecting the other kids. Just selfish.

What does that have to do with the fact that she has lost both her legs? Quite possibly because of negligent care? You are entitled to an opinion as am I, and mine is that only an absolute arse with no empathy is incapable of separating the two issues, and thinks that she deserves all she gets.

I know a few very large families, they are all loved and cared for. But I guess being at the upper end of the class spectrum they are spared this kind of attack.