Women are encouraged to have vaginal births due to…

[Undkonm]

1. cost
2. because women are not treated like men in terms of pain management

I have read (and also strongly believe) that the nhs encourages vaginal births to save money. A consultant has recently come forward to say exactly this. It is appalling and women are still falling for the narrative that vaginal birth is the only real way to give birth.

Don’t get me wrong, I know there are huge risks with all medical intervention such a c section. But I know so many people who have ended up with an emergency c section and it’s been awful for them. In contrast, those I know (including myself) who elected a c section by choice had a peaceful and largely predictable birth.

This toxic narrative that birth is only birth if you give birth vaginally is another abuse of women. I am glad I had the insight and confidence to push for what was best for me. I know other women who desperately wanted a c section but were pushed around and didn’t get to have it elected.

When will this end? I should add that I also strongly believe women who want vaginal births should be absolutely supported but it should be an active choice to do that, not the expected ‘norm.’

Do others agree? Do you have other thoughts on this? To go one step further I think the abuse of women continues when the baby arrives with huge pressure to breast feed. Just leave women alone to make decisions that are right for THEM.

This. Just because we have the mechanism doesn’t mean it always works. I had a planned section and it was a great experience. I healed well compared to friends with birth trauma and third degree tears. Hope it goes well for you.

I also read an article about the approach to maternal request c-sections on the NHS. They were finding that women who were being firmly told ‘no’ from the start were way more likely to become even more set against having a vaginal birth, fight harder to get a cesarean or move care over to a hospital that would do it. Women who were told ‘Yes of course you can if that’s what you wish to choose’ from the beginning were far happier to explore other options with the hospital and see if they could be supported in opting for vaginal birth- which many did in the end.

If this is in response to me using that phrase, it misses out the part where 'vaginal birth will always be the default'... what I was saying that ELCS will never be the default option and offered to everyone when our bodies can birth vaginally... I also said that I know vaginal is not right for everyone or always the safest, and as long as everyone has an informed choice then that is what matters.

Thank you very much.
I'm long past the point of having to worry about any of this myself, but I do hope other women at least look at the evidence. The best choice is always an informed choice.

Absolutely right.
Maternal mortality is still a huge problem in the developing world.

I was not disappointed at all. I wanted a c section, I had one, it was lovely, zero disappointment. You couldn't convince me that a vaginal birth is a lovely thing that isn't terrifying and excruciatingly painful for all the magic in Narnia.

I hate these threads, why does it have to always be one thing being better than the other. What about freedom of choice because we’re all individuals and it’s not one size fits all.

This! It’s pretty dehumanising to women as well. We are all so different and will bring a unique set of beliefs, preferences, values, what risks we are happier to take than others.. Just because I wouldn’t personally choose an elective c-section for non-medical reasons doesn’t mean that choice should be denied to other women, regardless of whether I can understand or relate to their reasons. It’s not my body or my business.

6% of women (including me) do a 'natural' vaginal birth and then end up having to have surgery as well due to a torn anus. Which can lead to lifelong problems and at the least is highly associated with incontinence in old age. It's not just the immediate post-birth recovery period we should be taking into account in these decisions.

Or the fact it’s more natural! Like breastfeeding yet hardly anyone I know wanted a vaginal birth or wanted to breastfeed!

Dying is also natural, absolutely natural in that its guaranteed to happen, but most of us hope to get a chance at a long life before experiencing it !

A random day in the library, there was an organisation asking people about antenatal, postnatal and birth experience of local people.

Most people liked the antenatal part, there were lots of complaints about postnatal care including no support for breastfeeding. I was the only one, they seen giving positive feedback about breastfeeding support.

I had a number that a midwife gave me to call and she ended up lending me a breastfeeding pump. Because nicu stopped lending them. That midwife was the only one with access to it. If you don't have her number, or a way to contact her. Then you miss out on support.

My son was born early and I hadn't looked at breastfeed pumps yet. With her support ds2 was breastfeed for two years. I appreciate her support.

So long as mum & baby are alive & as well as possible I really have no opinion on how they got there.

DS1 was hospital natural birth - nearly pushed him out in the toilet cos I didn't know I was in the final stages. No one told me to expect that sensation.

DS2 hospital, probably should have been emergency c-section. Was so tangled in his cord he couldn't get out & was blue. I knew something was wrong, consultant nearly sent me home (before a midwife intervene with some sneaky trickery) where we both would have died. Horrific & traumatic experience.

DS3 born on the floor at home. Back to back, rotated as he came out by the midwife. 9lbs fucking 11oz. Amazing experience!

But! Explain to me how hospitals deal with multiple women wanting (not needing) c-sections at the same time. It's not remotely practical & doesn't allow for emergency c-sections to be done at the drop of a hat. Around 1600 babies are born every day in England.

I personally do believe that the NHS should recommend vaginal births in low risk pregnancies with no risks identified. A vaginal birth is the natural way to give birth and is less strenuous on our bodies with a much easier recovery most of the time. I have had 2 vaginal births and have been very lucky to have an extremely positive experience each time. When I had my second I was up and about completely back to normal running around the hospital buffet while the other 3 women in post natal were in agony and unable to walk after their c-sections.

However, I do think that after that recommendation the woman chooses to have a c-section then that is 100% her choice to make and should not be pushed to do otherwise.

i also think pain relief needs to be given more and immediately after it’s been requested. I had no pain relief for my first and for my second I asked constantly for some pain relief (not epidural) and finally got some pethidine 10 minutes before he was born so a complete waste of time.

I don't know why women feel they are entitled to use NHS resources by having a non emergency c-section when they could just give birth naturally. If you want a c-section just because you don't want to go through the process of giving birth then go private or consider not getting pregnant.

Or just wait for natural birth to happen at 40-42 weeks?

Agree with the above. I've had a mixture of both vaginal births and c sections (4 live births).

@BruFord

Agreed. I was induced and had an EMCS with my 9lb7 back to back baby first time around. Not once did a midwife even remark on baby's position. Baby was 42 weeks at induction and I queried induction and was told that it was either that or wait for natural birth and accept my placenta may fail and the baby would die. I spent 24 hours with my husband in a room, blood pressure was taken every 3 hours, but no midwife ever stopped to chat, or to show any interest at all. I spent a lot of time on all fours and also paced around the hospital and went up and down the stairs to try to help baby to move down, passed the midwife desk several times and no one even smiled at me. Not a single bit of curiosity. It was really weird.

When I was 8 cm dilated, I was moved to the birthing suite, they broke my waters and put me on a drip and I started throwing up so extremely that I threw up blood into the sink and my teeth started chattering. Midwives just watched. In the end, 12 hours later, I pushed from 10cm on command but nothing was happening, never had any downward pressure (had Braxton hicks in my second pregnancy and I was like "wow", these tightenings across my bump are seriously different to the searing pain in my back), so I was taken to the operating theatre "to decide if it is CS or foreceps", assessed by a consultant who considered that baby was far too high, would never move through my pelvis and it was time for EMCS. I had a haemorrhage on the operating table.

I fell asleep after i was wheeled out of the operating theatre and woke up in recovery to two midwives berating me for not having fed my baby yet. And I had missed dinner. Those who had a VB got given tea and toast, but it was never offered to me so we ordered a takeaway. I had to be kept in for monitoring due to blood loss.

It's a broken system. I decided not to go through it again and had an ELCS with second in the pandemic - I just couldn't spend another 3+ days in hospital and potentially on my own as my husband couldn't come back again if he left to see my first child. It was dreamy and the medical staff were so nice in the operating theatre. Aftercare was non existent, though, and I was made to walk to get my dinner tray because no one would help me, my wound split and then I was told off for that. Then they put the tape so tight on my abdomen that at 10 days PP my scar had to be waxed. It was painful, but I dug in. My midwife remarked that she was surprised i coped so well as she had assumed I had a lower pain threshold due to having a CS. WTF?!

Honestly, if I had been treated as an individual and not a piece of meat in the NHS, I'd have tried for a VB second time around but I just am so jaded with the whole thing and I don't think that the culture is very good. If you have a straightforward quick birth, they love you, but god forbid you are a tougher case!

Because for most of human history the only option for feeding a baby was either to breastfeed yourself or employ a wet nurse, who would feed your baby as well as (or instead of) her own child. This was not an ideal arrangement as babies did not get colostrum from their mothers, and some wet nurses were 'professional', that is they lactated for years, going from nursery to nursery feeding babies. Not until sterilization was perfected was it entirely safe to give milk artificially, though we know that feeding bottles existed from at least the eighteenth century (and were one cause of infant mortality). Although it was realised that babies did not thrive on cows's milk (too high in fat) and so goats' milk was used, the problem of clean bottles still caused illness and death. So some of us are actually NOT here because mothers were unable to feed, usually because of poor nutrition, sometimes problems with nipples such as some women experience today. and so their babies died. Such women were bred out, since many or all of their children did not survive (except among the upper classes who routinely used wet-nurses - and where infant mortality was still high) and so whatever the problem was the next generation was not there to carry it on - and those people are not here.
Now we have generations of artificially fed babies and women feel that breastfeeding is difficult. I sometimes wonder if this is a result of advertising ploys of artificial baby milk manufacturers, in whose interest it was to make breastfeeding look difficult, and to promote bottle feeding as 'convenient' and breastfeeding as inconvenient, and even 'cowlike' and unattractive.
That's why I think if most women could not breastfeed then some of us would not be here. Some people are not here, because their mother could not breastfeed.

Sure, death is normal. Sure if ill I would go to the doctor. But OP is advocating for a situation where when I go to said doctor they can't recommend a treatment based on facts. They can't tell me what is likely to have better outcomes. How is that a good idea? I am not the one pushing a radical stance here, she is.

Pushing for days in severe pain and an emergency C-section sounds horrific.

@Lolaandbehold That's something I genuinely don't understand, given how advanced modern medicine is. Why would women be left to labour for hours before having an emergency c-section?

As I said upthread, my two were born quickly, six hours for DD, less than three for DS, so I clearly didn't need that intervention. But why leave a woman for 20 hours, for example? Perhaps that is driven by money, I don't know?

My vaginal births were both lovely positive experiences and I had no pain relief!

id do it again in a heart beat. Sadly husband says no 🤣

If so, it's a false economy once you factor in the cost of treating purely incontinence (let alone other long-term issues) arising from a vaginal birth rather than elective c-section. If I remember correctly it was the Birth Rights charity that costed this as a comparison some years ago.

There was at one point a line pushed that it is pregnancy itself that causes single or double incontinence in women and that vaginally birth didn't really exacerbate the issue which was also not the case.

Of course, that's assuming that women feel entitled to seek treatment for their incontinence at all, and are not scorned out of the doctor's office should they do so.

The number of mothers who laughingly tell me there is no way they can jump on a trampoline anymore as though that's to be expected after having children is depressing.

Sadly you are right. When home birth was the norm, up till the 50s, the maternal mortality rate was higher. Hospital births were promoted to save the lives of mothers.

Sadly though, you are not right either. An assumption was made in the late 60s that hospital births were safer and it became policy. Marjorie Tew was a statistician who set her students the task of analysing the stats to show why this policy had come about. The students after analysing the stats said that this assumption could not be supported, and that home births were safer. She didn't believe that her students had done the analysis properly and analysed the stats herself, and her students were correct. Not that this went down well with hospital authorities when she pointed this out.

But, there is a caveat here, this research was done at least 35 years ago when maternity services were very different. Until the early 1970s Local Authorities were obliged to provide a domiciliary midwifery service to support women give birth in their own homes. They were midwives assisting with home births day in day out and so had a lot of experience. Nor were there another couple of women given birth in the other bedrooms in the house with one midwife running between three.

Now since so few women give birth at home and midwifery services are provided by hospital trusts there aren't the numbers involved to make valid comparisons.

The Place of Birth study of 2011 also showed that home births were safe. This also took note of the risk assessment of the women's' pregnancies, so they were making a comparison of like for like risks.

But this study couldn't be done today either. It would be good to see a survey done where the outcomes for hospitals which have high induction and EMCS rates are compared with those hospitals which have lower rates.

What is also extremely distressing is that staffing issues and lack of staff and continuity of care are continually highlighted and nothing changes. What did the previous Govenment do? Scrap bursaries for trainee nurses and midwives. What has the present Government promised? I haven't a clue.

I didn't find it terrifying at all and I had a spinal block so it was pain free. No recovery issues either. It's luck of the draw though.

I experienced both and the recovery from vaginal birth was so much quicker. There are health benefits for the baby too. But every situation is unique and should be weighed up with consideration for baby and mother.

1. cost

No, no, no. Vaginal births are safest for mum and baby if there are no complications. C-sections are more expensive, because they are more dangerous and recovery requires a longer hospital stay and wound after-care

2.because women are not treated like men in terms of pain management
Where in the hell does this thought come from? Childbirth has so many pain management options we are spoiled for choice.