To think the NHS discourages c sections on purpose?

[tablebrush]

I often hear a lot of negatives about c sections (and not usually from women who have had them). You hear how it's not natural and how it's major surgery and how the recovery is awful and how it's all so much worse etc etc
But the women I speak to who have had them often speak of how positive their experiences were and how it was much more pleasant than a vaginal birth.
I understand it is major surgery but giving birth isn't exactly a walk in the park, and can (and often does) leave you with ongoing injuries.
AIBU to think the NHS/midwives put women off c sections due to cost and that they may actually be a better or at least equal, option for birth?

I had an EMCS, Well, no, technically it was semi-elective as it wasn't an emergency, but DS was stuck and wasn't coming out the normal shute for love not money.

It was wonderful after 30 hours of b2b labour to be numb and giving birth. I would absolutely have an elective section if I had another baby.

I read on here that the actual difference in price of a section Vs vaginal birth when broken down was about £80.

Women should give birth in the way they choose to, whether that be an elective section, home birth or in the middle of the woods with an elf playing pan pipes. As long as they understand the risks. Body autonomy and choice is paramount.

The studies re bonding etc are valid and real. This is also why women who have a stillbirth are generally encouraged to do so naturally as even an elective section can be hugely traumatic in a way which a VB is not.

There is of course a place for caesarean in birth but this should not be something which women should be able to ask for just because they want one without absolutely valid reasons.

I had two c sections and wee when I cough.

I get your point op, you have obviously had a very traumatic time, it’s so clear from your second post. But the evidence is that vaginal births fo carry less risk for both mum and baby, and the recovery time is faster. The risks of infection is lower in natural birth.

C sections are not a walk in the park. The first few days I could not get out of bed unaided. I could not bend down, not feed my DSs sitting had to do it lying down. I couldn’t drive, posh a buggy was painful, forget pushing for a poo. It has been 11 years now and I still have to wear granny knickers because anything that rubs on the scar is painful. I don’t want to get into the battle of ‘my birth was worst than yours’ but c sections are not as easy as you think they are.

There is of course a place for caesarean in birth but this should not be something which women should be able to ask for just because they want one without absolutely valid reasons

Why, if you don't mind me asking, in your opinion, is "because I want one" not a valid reason?

Mmmm. I know more women who have turned down the offer of a section actually and none that have wanted one and been denied. One definitely deeply regrets her decision. I think they will offer it if medically necessary.

They long term cost of vaginal versus Caesarian is pretty equal if you factor in birth injuries, treatment lateral in life ( ie post menopausal prelates etc), babies affected by things such as cerebral palsy. Unfortunately when they are working out their budgets they don’t factor in twenty years down the line, that’s for some other government to worry about.
They care about what’s on paper now. Hence they push vaginal births and there are a lot of pressure to get c section numbers down.

My next baby will be an ELCS strongly recommended by the NHS. I am very reassured they've said this as that's what I'd like. After an EMCS (Placental abruption) I've no experience of being steered away from a caesarean despite a vaginal delivery being a possibility for a second baby. I was totally for a vaginal delivery for my first but having experienced the ordeal of being wheeled to theatre being told my baby was in immense stress after 13 hours of back to back labour I'm reassured the next one may hopefully be a positive experience.

Yes. Bonding studies are real, and valid. However, it doesn't mean that caesarian births are necessarily a worse option. I know that sounds contradictory, but generalisations are typically contradictory. However, if a woman can have a vaginal birth, without undue risk - either physically, psychologically, or emotionally - then (yes, generally) it is better.

The NHS is on its knees without supporting the too posh to push brigade in their lifestyle choices!

I've had 2 c sections - one emergency, one with a "precious baby" following a stillbirth. My 1st two babies were delivered vaginally. If I'd known that I'd face 20 years of pain from scar tissue and adhesions, I'd have fought tooth and nail to avoid them. A c section is major abdominal surgery, and should only be an option where the mother or baby's lives are at risk.

EyUp in 2011 the BBC suggested

Caesareans do come at a higher cost. The NICE report estimates a normal birth costs an average of £1,512, planned Caesareans cost £2,369 and emergency C-sections cost £3,042.

30 years ago only 10% of babies were born by c section, now it's 25%. Women's bodies haven't changed that much in a generation.

Yes, and there were higher rates of neonatal death 30 years ago too. As the C-section rate increases, so the rate of neonatal death decreases. Might be worth investigating why.

I had an emergency cs with my DS after 29 hours of labour which resulted in him being severely distressed. I ended up with severe PND (of which I am still feeling the effects of 3 years later). If I was pregnant again I would definitely want an elective. I'm not sure my MH could take another experience like it

No "because I want one" isn't a valid reason. If you just want one with no clinical reason, pay for it. I want my cataracts operated on now, they don't yet meet the NHS criteria so I can wait or I can pay £3k per eye. The NHS doesn't exist to fulfill wants.

YANBU! And it's clearly working. All this suggestion that c section is more dangerous, gas more risks. Which is actually false but people throw it out on every c section thread!

Bluelady except outside of London and the south west you can't pay for a c section.

The NICE report doesn't take into account the very high costs of dealing with long term vaginal birth injuries including scarring, prolapses, incontinence etc. Apparently the costs even up.

I always thought the NHS discouraged them simply because they're harder on a woman's body than a straightforward labour? Of course in emergency situations they're vital, and save many lives, but if they're not 'needed' they're not encouraged.

Obviously money is an issue, especially during recent years, but I've never known anyone who very deliberately wanted a C-section being refused one in our local trust. A close friend chose one when she had her DD simply because she wanted to be in control of how and when her baby came, her Consultant went with her preferences and my friend was thrilled that she was 'the boss' of her own labour.

TomHardysNextWife and if I'd known I'd have a lifetime of incontinence and nerve damage I'd have fought tooth and nail for a c section. But you can't know these things.

SweetheartNeckline Did that factor in the cost of the aftermath of birth do you know? So the surgeries to repair, counselling, physio etc. (I'm not being facetious, I'm genuinely asking).

Obviously I can only go off my personal experience but I had a section, was out of hospital after 24 hours, shopping in town four days after. Was absolutely fine, breastfed straight from birth, no problems bonding, no follow up appointments other than the standard ones. My cousin had a terrible time, birthed vaginally, tore from arsehole to breakfast time, has had multiple issues, had to have surgery and had all kinds of lasting problems years on. I'll wager her birth cost much more than mine. So to my mind, it all cancels out in the end.

The neonatal death rate has indeed fallen, the research shows this is due to progress in neonatal care, the increase in c sections isn't even mentioned.

link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13414-015-0969-3

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/mothers-bond-better-with-babies-after-natural-births-918051.html

www.stroeckenverdult.be/site/upload/docs/Isppm%20tijdschrift%20CAESAREAN%20BIRTH%20babies.pdf

There is something now called the "gentle" or "natural" caesarean - which my ob/gyn did - where a baby still has the experience of being 'birthed': www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/09/natural-caesareans-could-soon-be-available-on-the-nhs/

C section is very expensive. It should be kept for when necessary, we were designed to give birth vaginally!

The only reason natural births are considered cheaper are because they only factor in immediate costs and complications.
The bladder problems needing physio a year later? Not costed in.
Repair surgery? Nope, unless immediately after, let's forget to include that.
Psychological trauma & counseling? Well if you have PTSD from a horrific labour the NHS is so on its knees you go without or pay privately.
The prolapse aspects? Women suffer in silence.

If you compare the "cost" it needs to be the full medical and mental cost associated with the birth event, not cherry picked to suit a particular agenda/short term accounting!

*slippermaiden" i was informed by my surgeon that I definitely wasn't designed to birth vaginally

C-sections carry more risk even when elective. My friend ended up on a drop for a week from a post operative infection then had to go in to sort out internal scar tissue problems when her baby was 6 weeks old - she had the elective following an emergency and and elective for her other two kids.