Green Party pledge to reduce c section rates

[TTCaxristi]

Is this something a political party should even get involved in?

I had understood that a focus on keeping c sections below an arbitrary threshold was at least partially responsible for the Shrewsbury maternity scandal.

https://news.sky.com/story/shrewsbury-maternity-scandal-the-babies-who-died-in-the-uks-worst-hospital-childbirth-scandal-12576727

It looks as though the greens are reviewing the policy now but am I alone in finding this chilling? What does it say about their attitude to women? I really strongly believe that it’s up to the individual woman how she gives birth, and the focus on arbitrary targets is misguided at best and dangerous at worst.

YABU - this is something a political party should have a policy on
YANBU - this is not something a non medical entity should have policy on

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/green-party-nhs-lbc-b1162105.html#

And I assume the party are all top level obstetricians? Honestly I despair at the political think tanks that don't have the cop on to read the bloody room on women's health and stay in their lane!

The article says the Green Party has pledged
“We will work to reduce the number of interventions in childbirth, and change the culture of the NHS so that birth is treated as a normal and non-medical event, in which mothers are empowered and able to be in control.”

They point to the high caesarean rate as a concern:
“The incidence of medical intervention in childbirth has escalated in recent years, particularly the rate of caesarean sections, which are expensive and, when not medically required, risky.”

I think their pledge to reduce the number of medical interventions is a good one as unecessary interventions do cause avoidable emergency c-sections. For example, breaking your waters manually increases risk of cord prolapse which causes an emergency csection. If they didn’t intervene to break your waters, then that risk and the resultant number of csections disappear.

There isn’t anything about reducing csections to an arbitrary number or limiting elective csections. They did admit that their pledge may have unintended messages and said
”In response to concerns raised about the wording and intent of the policy, Dr Devulapalli wrote on X: “There is no intention to stop or reduce medical care provision during pregnancy and childbirth.”

But why is it for politicians to develop policy in this space? I’m not a doctor but surely it’s up to them and their patient to decide what to do in the circumstances without the doctor having to also consider government policy potentially limiting what they can do.

It always annoys me with this argument that they label C-section as risky but what about vaginal birth. That comes with a risk too!

It’s a reactive stance not a proactive one.

If they really were concerned they would be talking about improving antenatal care, more appts, additional scans, better facilities in delivery units and more home birth teams etc.

Did they not read the Ockenden Review?! Honestly policies like this make me so sad. Yes birth is a natural event but it can’t be sugarcoated that it comes with incredible risks too that often need to be medically managed. I had a ventouse delivery with DC1 and an ELCS with DC2. Both were very necessary. I’m a huge advocate for natural birth where appropriate but this sounds like a sledgehammer policy that would not benefit women.

YES YES YES.Thank you @goldenpears

The Greens are such an embarrassment of a party. On the radio the other day the presenter even said “now that the parties are committed to green targets, what is the point of your party any more” and she just fluffed and scrambled.

In Australia now they’re a bunch of racist, anti Jew, anti women communists who would do away with private healthcare and private schools. They are as hard left as it’s possible to be in this day and age.

This is chilling. Misogyny and Puritanism dressed up as a progressive policy.

Theres always been a bossy shading into authoritarian tendency about some pro environment politicians but this is in a different league and would be a total dealbreaker for me if I had ever considered voting Green (which I hadn’t really).

I think the frothing about “intervention” in labour is unscientific nonsense anyway and pernicious nonsense which as others have said is associated with some very dangerous approaches to managing childbirth. But whatever your view on this it’s not a proper subject for politicians to involve themselves in. Really shocked to have read this.

birth is treated as a normal and non-medical event, in which mothers are empowered and able to be in control.”

That normal, non-medical event killed an awful lot of women and babies before modern medical care.

Why are they involved at all. But it’s the Green Party they aren’t in any danger of getting in are they.

Watched Springwatch this week. Runt chick didn't get enough to eat and was torn up by the parents to feed to the other chicks. That's natural too.

Just because it's "natural" at a species level doesn't mean I want nature to take its course and have an unassisted vaginal birth for my footling breech baby.

birth is treated as a normal and non-medical event, in which mothers are empowered and able to be in control.”

This is such misguided and unscientific nonsense. Attitudes like this have been at the heart of so much of the degradation of maternity care.

The fact a supposedly progressive party is championing this is disturbing.

Yet another reason to not vote green.

It's a fundamental lack of understanding of obstetric issues.

Yes, there can be a cascade of interventions that can lead to instrumental/surgical deliveries in labours that might have ended in SVDs if "left alone".

But it's ignoring the fact that, due to medical advances, more and more women are now becoming pregnant and carrying to term what are termed "high risk pregnacies". They need intervention and closer monitoring. Unstable diabetes, coronary heart disease, severe lung conditions, immune system issues, clotting disorders etc etc etc.

That and the fact, that surgery is overall safer than decades before (though still high risk), and many women want to chose how they deliver.

The more policies the Greens talk about, the less electable they become, which is good. The only place they did get elected (Brighton) was a total shit show.

Why on earth are they sticking their oar in here? Total nonsense policy that will put mothers and babies at risk.

And they just lost any hope of ever getting my vote.

I'm now a green voter without a political 'home'

I've always been 'green', doing what I can to reduce environmental damage and be very mindful of resource use - but I simply can't vote for the Green Party because of their left wing stance on a lot of things. It is possible to be 'green' without being on the left/being a socialist, and I wish they'd realise this.

For example, breaking your waters manually increases risk of cord prolapse which causes an emergency csection. If they didn’t intervene to break your waters, then that risk and the resultant number of csections disappear.

But if they didn't break your waters you might not go into labour. In which case it might result in a stillborn due to placenta failure etc.

I wonder what the rato of men to women in the party is reviewing this.

Exactly. Anyone with any level of interest in history should know that.

This is an absolutely disgraceful policy which needs to be binned immediately.

It’s extremely ignorant, especially in the wake of reports into maternity scandals that showed mothers being forced into dangerous births that often led to the loss of their babies (and sometimes the mum too.) Birth is a significant undertaking and if a woman wants a c-section, she should be able to have one, even if that reason is that she does not want to give birth vaginally. A lot of talk about it being major surgery and the recovery (which it is, I had one) but many women suffer third degree tears or have lifelong continence issues. There is risk associated with birth and women should be able to make an informed choice and no talk of “expense” coming into it.

I think many people don’t realise what the greens are like these days and still think the environment is there entire focus when in fact it is nonsense like this and men in frocks and wigs. Women have been thrown out of the party if they dare to question.
As for elective c sections I think choice should be available to all women balanced with proper medical advice before they make their decision.
I am also sick of men spouting their views on issues about women's bodies.
No fanny, no vote.

In my opinion, as a general rule, no politician has any business in anything of apolitical nature. But then the NHS exists, so my opinion has been moot for at least the last half century.

In schools, when they have ' mock elections', the Green Party always wins as school age pupils think they are all about saving the earth and making it nicer for everyone.

As an adult, we know there is a ' dark side' to the Green Party. They are often very conservatively religious, and can often come up with idealistic but completely unrealistic policies.

This is a great example, of course in an ideal world there wouldn't be as many caesareans, but they are a vital medical intervention that saves lives both of mothers and new borns. It's ridiculous to have this as a manifesto issue.

My judgement is slightly clouded though as we have a perennial Green Party candidate in my area that always comes 4th in any election, does no campaigning whatsoever, and takes vital votes away from the Labour candidates which allows the Tories to get dangerously close to getting in.