To find the BBC article on research on c sections and evolution a bit off?

[bummymummy77]

_t.co/jrKmhdvCwy
_
I find it a bit off. Yes it's science and cold hard fact but for some reason the tone got to me a bit.

And this is coming from someone who had a home birth and is very anti unnecessary interventions.

I can imagine it making women who've had c sections feeling like shite.

Seemed to me a little like the way it was worded is added to the quiet drip drip of c section stigma.

I mean, we've evolved past having enough body hair to survive in caves and eat raw meat, we treat cancer and intervene medically to save 1000's of lives daily.

At the same time I find it interesting and obviously most research will benefit mankind in some way.

What are other's views on it?

I think it's a noted star because TWO lives are preserved - so it's double the effect on the population

I was a bit when my collleague mentioned it but there is validity

"What's with all this being upset about having a Caesarean, or not being able to breastfeed, or whatever, anyway?"

I'd be upset about not being able to breastfeed, or conceive naturally or carry a baby to term. For goodness sake aren't we allowed to feel sad when our bodies can't do what we want them to do? Even if we are feeling grateful for medical intervention which allows us and our babies to survive these things?

Sad if you think you would have enjoyed it, but a failure?!

I completely get why people might be upset, I started out with quite a romanticised view of the whole thing but I was so young. It's easy for me to say I'm not disappointed now that I have a grandchild and enjoying being non-reproductive again.

Clearly none of these things are failures at all!

But you can't stop SOME people feeling like they are. Some people just do. I'm not about to tell anyone how they should or shouldn't feel. Just try to sympathise.

We're struggling with secondary infertility, I wish more people did think of how others are feeling and I may not be made to feel so shitty about it so often. I feel like a failure because when we finally did conceive I lost it. Many have told me I shouldn't feel like that but it doesn't stop me or help any.

I don't see the problem with the article at all. I thought it was pretty positive about C-sections, pointing out that larger babies are healthier and C sections meant we could diminish the effect of the evolutionary forces which inhibit larger babies.

I had a c-section, and IVF. I bloody love science and its impact on evolution!

Never mind 'failure' - its ok to grieve for what you wanted and didn't get, when other people seem to have it so easily.

YABU to refer to it as science and cold hard fact when actually, it's pretty flawed. Just because some scientists managed to get something published doesn't mean it has any legitimacy.

The question, really, is to what extent BBC science journalists ought to simply accept the conclusions of a report at face value, and how much they ought to be expected to interrogate them a bit.

Useful summary of some of the criticisms here:

www.skepticalob.com/2016/12/are-c-sections-changing-the-maternal-pelvis-maybe-but-this-paper-doesnt-show-it.html

Usual caveats apply when quoting from Skeptical OB, but anyone who has a problem with it should be telling us why with reference to the conclusions rather than any of the author's more, erm, colourful posts.

Other people telling you not to feel that way won't help, I agree, as you can't turn off feelings just because people tell you to, so I apologise for being unsympathetic. However, when I have felt a failure or to blame for things that were not my fault in the past, cognitive behavioural therapy was suggested and it did help me see how much my own thought processes were exacerbating the pain I felt.

Didn't like the reference to young child bearing diabetics. That really got my goat!! Majorly.

I don't feel the slightest bit sad that I didn't give birth naturally. I'm jubilant that I have a healthy child.

I didn't 'want' a natural birth, I can't see any particular value in it.

However, posts like minifingerz are interesting, because there's an implication there that I should want it and should feel sad that it didn't happen. Which, in fairness, is more or less the same message communicated by NCT.

So, why is society peddling a message designed to make women feel like failures? Or is there an innate desire to do things 'naturally' that I just don't understand?

Surely this is bollocks. How on earth did they manage to adequately analyse the data to identify mothers who have only had CS (because if you've had one CS and one VB, fetopelvic disproportion was probably not the issue). Also I thought fetopelvic disproportion was one of those catch all terms like failure to progress that is rarely investigated or understood.

Foot size is not correlated to pelvis size in women any more than it is correlated to penis size in men.

I'm really struggling to see any problem with the article.

"because there's an implication there that I should want it and should feel sad that it didn't happen."

Would you like to quote the actual words in my posts which imply that you should want a straightforward birth and that you should feel sad it didn't happen, because I don't see that in my posts at all.

Laurie to be fair, minifingerz does tend to take a view on these issues which is at a particular end of the scale. I don't think it's that reflective of people in general, based on those I know in real life.

purple it's a fluke those of us with poor sight made it this far. Our caveman ancestors would have been eaten by bears they didn't see coming.

I used to react really badly to articles and reports on the possible effects of stress on pregnancy. If it feels deeply personal and designed to make you feel bad, even though it really shouldn't, there's a problem with the way you are thinking and rationalising things - so it's better to try to change the way you think about it, rather than trying to shut down others who accidentally trigger your unhelpful thoughts and feelings. You can do something about your own reactions, but cannot do much to censor others in a world of free speech and badly reported scientific research.

"Or is there an innate desire to do things 'naturally' that I just don't understand?"

Nobody wants an emergency c-section or a forceps delivery if they can give birth to a healthy baby without one do they?

I've had a forceps birth and after that you fucking bet I had an innate desire to push my baby out myself second time around.

Nobody wants an emergency c-section or a forceps delivery if they can give birth to a healthy baby without one do they?

Presumably you're aware that there's another form of non-natural delivery that lots of women do want, though?

ELCS has nowt to do with fetopelvic disproportion though, as it can't be diagnosed in advance.

I am totally flummoxed at how the researchers got their numbers for this. Not enough to wade through the paper though!

ELCS has nowt to do with fetopelvic disproportion though, as it can't be diagnosed in advance.

Sure, but the mention of ELCS was in relation to a discussion about whether there's an innate desire to do it naturally, not the contents of the research per se. It's obviously not a very satisfactory answer to a question about whether women innately desire 'natural' birth to basically say nobody wants two of the more traumatic alternatives, whilst ignoring the one that people who don't want natural birth tend to prefer.

Agree with your flummoxery though!

Radio guy on BBC Sussex this morning actually said 'please can all the small pelvis women stop breeding', which I think he may regret when he hears it back!

I've got 4 kids, one c section and it was the smallest of the 4. The 10 lb one was no problem. I think mine had more to do with doctors and midwives with hangovers on the 1st January.

I did find this a bit offensive. Why is there no research done into finding better ways to diagnose potential birth issues before a woman gives birth, midwifery seems so antiquated to me, why do they not find out if the baby is back to back for example? And why doesn't anyone research if the increase in inductions has caused an increase in c-sections? This article glosses over other reasons for c-sections.

I woke to the report on Radio 4 and actually felt thankful that I had my children in the 21st century when medical intervention meant I didn't die in childbirth. 2 of my 3 DC were born by emergency c-section, 100 years ago we probably wouldn't have survived.