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?

My sister in Australia wasn't dilating properly when she gave birth, so they gave her a c section. Here, I laboured for 52 hrs, was augmented with a drip when I didn't dilate properly, denied a c section despite asking/begging three times, and ended up with a forceps delivery which left me with permanent damage. Won't have any further children.

At my birth debrief, I was told if I'd really wanted a c section, I should have just refused all treatment (life saving or otherwise) so they HAD to do it. What kind of response is that???

Ultimately I did need forceps, and goodness knows what would have happened to us both without them, but my view is that it shouldn't have got to that point.

It often seems that the worst outcomes of c sections, are compared to the best outcomes of vaginal births. Vagina births are pushed as "best", and it's not always the case.

There is no such thing as 'too late' for an emergency section. There is no reason to use forceps.

Failed forcep deliveries result in emergency sections so the 'too late' argument is bullshit. What they mean is that there is no one available to do the C section and baby needs to be out asap. Denmark manages fine without forceps.

Oddly enough if they encouraged women to labour and push away from lying on the bed (so baby can transition properly) then much, much fewer interventions would ever be needed...

I asked my midwife (home birth midwifery service) if she'd ever had to use interventions during a home birth or had one transferred in... She said around 10, in 10 years. But when she was an NHS midwife she said they were every few births as the women were always told to 'get back on the bed'. Part of the reason she left is because she saw the damage the NHS conveyor belt maternity units caused by understaffing and ignorant, miserable attitudes from older midwives.

I take it home births would be a no go in a country with a non instrumental delivery as the risk would be too high

You’d be right. Home birth is actually illegal here, though never knew why.

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.

This. The point is that in many other countries you wouldn’t be allowed to get into a state where they’re necessary.

so does that mean that there are more caesareans in Denmark - because if that is the case - how is that an improvement? & is this percentage of births or number of births - ie which country has higher birth rate? You do know that caesareans can cause other health issues?

*Wow. To be honest, it hurts a bit to have someone suggest that the instrument that saved both of our lives when I gave birth to my first baby should be banned.

No, it shouldn’t - at least not until hospitals are properly funded and staffed to allow each and every birth to be properly managed. Instrumental births are not ideal, but necessary when no other options are left.*

Talk about missing the point. I think I can say with absolute confidence that the OP is not suggesting that medical staff should have left you and your baby to die rather than use forceps.

I suspect she is suggesting that your birth should have been managed so that it didn’t get to a point where the choices available were a) use forceps to drag baby out by its head or b) let mother and baby die.

Fiveredbricks that's not what I was told. I was in theatre, spinal blocked and all ready for a c-section but they couldn't get DS's head back up, so forceps were considered safer.

Okay, so I have friends who have basically lost their figures through having a section. And one who suffered secondary infertility afterwards. But surely the risk factors for a timely section are lower than for an instrumental delivery?

A lot went wrong when I was in labour. I had ventous, followed by forceps. Although the first couple of weeks post partum were no picnic, I am now ten weeks on. My 1st degree tear had totally healed and I have no issues...I've just been tunning round the park with the baby! I am very grateful to the doctors for the safe delivery of my little boy.

I had anal incontinence for months after forceps delivery, though my baby was fine. Would never have another baby though, totally horrific & developed severe PND

I had the Keilands (high rotational forceps) in a central London teaching hospital in 2011. Both my DC and I were left with permanent damage and zero ongoing support (for me). My DC had physio until age two but still suffers from permanent damage that can’t be fixed. I had dual incontinence for 6 months, and bought and used my own kegel 8 machine to recover enough to go back to work. I was one of the ‘lucky ones’ to be repaired straight after birth by a consultant obstretric surgeon but he told me straight away that the repairs would not hold another pregnancy. I accepted that and only have one child. The damage and scarring has been very traumatic for me and my husband and we have no sex life. I am lucky that he is a lovely man and accepts that this is the price we paid for our child. I was not offered any aftercare or support as my injuries ‘weren’t serious enough’ and ‘the services couldn’t cope’. GP actively discouraged me from seeking further help. I really hope that changes are made to prevent any more women from suffering as I have. The hospital knew a had a huge baby over 9 pounds and I laboured for 52 hours. Unfortunately for us there were too many others in the queue ahead of me who were in a worse situation so we were left to get on with it. Yes, I’m grateful to have a child at all but was badly let down by the care I received. I was not born in the UK and neither were ANY of the other mothers on the post natal ward where I was with my baby for 5 days. In fact I know that at least two of the mothers entered the UK illegally to give birth in order to save their children’s lives, I spoke to them and they told me their stories. There is no right or wrong and I was luckily mentally strong enough to cope but I really hope improvements/changes to guidelines can be made.

Well good for you Liver.

There is no such thing as 'too late' for an emergency section Just not true. My DD was very nearly out. Her forceps delivery was in theatre with 2 obstetricians, an anaethetist, midwife, more nurses than I can remember. Everything had been progressing beautifully until it suddenly wasn't.

They used forceps when I was delivering my son as his heart had slowed down so basically he could have died without forceps.

Oddly enough if they encouraged women to labour and push away from lying on the bed (so baby can transition properly) then much, much fewer interventions would ever be needed.

I had first in Midwife led unit and she was constantly trying to get me on the bed - I wanted to be walking and chose a kneeling position that later found would have been great for my what turned out to be large baby.

She did in end get me on the bed in stirrups for final bit. Next was HB and there was no such pressure.

Hmmmmm. When ds1 went into distress they examined me to see if I was fully dilated - if I had been they would have used forceps, but I wasn't so I had a c section. So certainly in the hospital that I delivered in, instrumental delivery would have been used in preference to c section, even though I hadn't started to push. C sections are not without their issues, but I am very glad I didn't have a forceps delivery.

I had a csection...but because of the position of my baby's head they had to use forceps to be able to safely deliver her. So csection does not mean no forceps...

There is no such thing as 'too late' for an emergency section. Just not true

Agreed. I had a placental abruption and went from 4cm to fully dilated in the time it took for them to run me down the corridor for a crash c section. By the time I got to theatre my baby was nearly there. Yes, they used forceps (after a failed attempt at ventouse) to get him out, as that was the quickest option. And yes, I suffered with anal incontinence afterwards, which has improved with physio. Would I change my choice to consent to forceps? No, I wouldn't. God knows what would have happened to him if I'd made them open me up, push him back up the birth canal and pull him out that way. My priority was, and would be again, getting him out safely. And I'm dubious as to whether that would have been any better for my pelvic floor anyway!

I did insist on an elective c section next time as I wasn't prepared to risk another abruption or further damage. But short of making all births c sections, no, I absolutely don't think they should ban instrumental deliveries.

My first dc was transverse/"unstable" in position, depending on who was examining me ante-natally.

DH and I both have larger than average head size (we both ride so know from purchasing/comparing comparison of hat/helmet sizes with others) so combined with the dc's preference for a transverse position I insisted I wanted a planned cs as baby was also measuring v.slightly large for dates.

This did not go down with the various HCP's but was eventually agreed on and documented as "maternal request - fear of childbirth". They would only book it for after the due date (possibly hoping I'd go into labour and be persuaded into a VB) which I went along with but dc was well and truly wedged diagonally so not dropping into birth canal and the GP practice midwife said she'd put money on it "taking dynamite the shift the little monkey !"

On the day of the cs hospital staff still tried to talk me out of it and into having an induction instead which was the absolute last thing I wanted so yet again I made myself unpopular and insisted on going ahead.

The cs itself was straight forward BUT the doctor still required forceps to get baby out, so from experience, having a cs does not mean no forceps.

It's interesting to note that (there are statistics somewhere that show that) a higher percentage of female doctors give birth by cs. Whether this is because they ask for and get an elective cs without all the disapproval that I experienced or whether staff are quicker to abandon VB and go to CS because they know there're dealing with a doctor I don't know.

I also know of two couples who had ivf babies and were told quite early on, when labour was not progressing well, that it was best to go straight to CS given that this was a precious and hard won ivf baby.

It seems like sometimes staff aren't prepared to risk a VB but sometimes the woman/baby have to endure absolutely any sort of interference/intervention to avoid a CS potentially leaving the mother with long term complications.

I think more women should feel free to ask for and be given an elective CS if that is what they would prefer but know from experience that you have to remain strong as HCPs are not keen to allow a choice.

When it's a case of life and death, instrumental delivery is the last thing on your mind.
Giving birth to a live baby is far better, call me old fashioned, if you like.
What a silly ill informed thread.

TinklyLittleLaugh - whilst ideally everyone would sneeze out their baby and go home the next day in their pre-pregnancy trousers, don't you think becoming incontinent is worse than losing one's figure? Especially given that figures start to head south anyway in a few decades after birth but shitting yourself is forever.

I am aware that this article is in the Daily Mail but the statistics it mentions do come from real research studies so it can’t be dismissed just because of the publication.

In many cases forceps are used before attempting a c-section. My friend had a failed forceps and emergency c-section delivery and it took a long time to resuscitate her poor baby. In her case it would have been much safer for both mother and baby to go straight to a caesarean.

It is really awful living with these kind of injuries and anything that can be done to prevent them from happening is a good thing. If other countries have reduced the rate of birth injuries then that is something that we should look into.

I think we do need to consider why the rate of these kinds of injuries has gone up so much in recent years.

If I have another baby I would only want to give birth by caesarean it is upsetting to hear that the woman whose story featured in the article was told that if she has another child she must have a natural birth despite the fact that it will make her injuries worse.

This is why I had planned sections, the damage done to women (and I know it's necessary) is terrible.

I would not be alive if my DM hadn't given birth in a hospital with an obstetrician who was able to do a rotational delivery with forceps. DM had been in labour 30 something hours and I was back to front but too low for a C section. DM still has to ruch to the loo when she needs to go but she reckons it was worth it.

@user1471426142 same here