That instrumental delivery should be banned?

[PineapplePower]

I know it’s the DM but this is shocking:

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-6797199/As-doctors-midwives-finally-act-searing-expos-childbirths-shameful-secret.html

They say 10 percent of mums suffer from some sort of anal incontinence! Claims forceps are the biggest cause so why are they still used? AIBU to say they should be banned? Why couldn’t you just get a C-sec at that point?

You are displaying complete ignorance. No-one would wish to do an instrumental delivery, but by the time the presenting part is in the vaginal canal it is not possible to do a C section. Instrumental delivery is sometimes the only option to save the life of both mother and child.
Don't take your information from the Daily mail

If the baby is already past a certain point in the birth canal then you can't do a c section. Incontinence is better than something happening to the baby, although obviously a horrible consequence for the mum.

Because it’s often too late for a section by the time an instrumental is needed. I for one am very glad an instrumental delivery was available otherwise I might have had a dead baby.

Yep you’re displaying an amazing level of ignorance. Instrumental deliveries are far from desirable but are sometimes necessary.

I'd presume because by the time a baby is low enough for instrumental delivery it would take extra time that they may not have to do a crash section.

YABU to read anything from the DM and post a thread like this.

I thought this would be about mailing guitars and drum kits

Everything pp’s have said.

@harrysowl 😂

The Daily Mail is not exactly a renowned medical journal. I do agree the damage they cause is worrying, but they are often used when no other options are available. What would you propose instead?

Instruments are only used when necessary. However there would be fewer instrumental births if there wasn't this pig headed attitude with pushing on with vaginal births despite it being obvious to everyone, especially the mother, that it isn't going to go well.

I've had two instrumental deliveries. One was awful (ventouse) one was absolutely fine (forceps). In both cases there was no other option (though I suspect forceps should have been used in my first delivery).

My friend was desperate for a vaginal delivery, by any means. She declined a c-section in favour of forceps.

That is a really interesting article.

With my 1st DC, they used foreceps without trying Ventous first, despite the doctor saying it was the easiest foreceps they had ever done.

I wonder whether the difficulties I had and still have could have been avoided.

Clearly they have successfully found alternatives to foreceps in Denmarl

Forceps (apparently) haven't been used in Denmark for 14 years. How do those who argue that forceps are sometimes essential explain that?

It was all over my birthplace no forceps and at the end I was begging for them. They prob saved mine and my sons life as I was hemorring and his heart had nearly stopped. It happened so quickly that if hey had gone to c section I may still be here but I believe DS would not have been as they would have had to push him back up the birth canal which is a hell of a lot more risky then forceps with a baby who has a good heartrate

I would like to see the success rates in Denmark of pushin a back up the birth canal in order to do a section.

I thought there were significant risks involved in pushing baby back up to avoid instrumental.

OP by the time instruments are needed, if they were weren't, there would be a lot more mothers and / or babies who don't survive.

Maybe I need to go over my notes as I nearly needed forceps but am not sure why. I had a long labour and not much food and fell asleep with epidural, woke up fully dilated, don't know what time. Doctor s thought forceps but midwife was very calm and told me she thought I could do it but I had one more chance to push. After she told me this it gave me just enough fear to get her out on my own. I remember trying to move off my back when I woke up but babys heart rate dropped if I went into my side. Also I had an episiotomy so maybe it was the blood loss that meant they considered forceps. The epidural satasfaction questionnaire they asked me in the morning (I raved about how great it was) had forceps written on it. I remember in NCT doing a birth plan and the main reason I didn't want an epidural was due to increase in forceps. It was a final resourt.

Forceps (apparently) haven't been used in Denmark for 14 years. How do those who argue that forceps are sometimes essential explain that?

They aren’t used in my home country either. But we also have a high c-section rate, too.

I've had two very positive ventouse deliveries with good recovery (despite an episiotomy and PPH after the first one) and minimal issues. They meant my babies were born in a good state (with dc2 it turned out the cord was round his neck twice, so it saved him a lot of distress and danger - his Apgar was 8 rising to 10 because they acted quickly at signs of distress).

My daughter and I would both be dead without an instrumental delivery. It was too late for C-Section. That is all the information I need to prove forceps have their place in delivery rooms.

If a c-section isn't possible when already in the birth canal, then why do failed forceps deliveries often end in a crash section? I don't understand.

Forceps saved my DC1's life, and mine. My parents (who ended up in hospital with me after things started to go badly wrong during delivery) had been warned to expect the worst. No, they're not ideal, and they were not on my non-intervention home-birth birth plan. But, like everything, they have their place.