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.

The above post has it right. No one is saying that women should be encouraged to have C-sections, but if a textbook vaginal birth isn't on the cards, a C-section should be considered to ensure the safety of mother and child.

9 times out of 10, when we hear about babies dying in birth/near full-term, its because they didn't get out of the birth canal/womb quickly enough/in time to receive medical assistance.

But due to cost and dogma, women are being pushed into vaginal delivery even after things start going wrong, and this is putting women's health and the lives of babies at risk. I understand C-section recovery can be hard, but if there's a risk of possible death/disability/debilitating injury, then a C-section must be offered to avoid these possible outcomes. Cost should not be a factor in that decision.

I can’t stand these debates. You should be able to birth (and feed!!!) your baby any damn way you want. It really is that simple. Vaginal birth can be traumatic. C-sections may have complications. And I get sick of everyone lumping emergency c-sections with planned. Absolutely different experiences and subsequently often very different recoveries involved.
And everyone still spouting the whole “breast feeding/ vaginal birth is better for mum and baby” nonsense just needs to wake up. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t. Stop forcing your views on everyone else.

I felt I was definitely encouraged towards a c- section. It was a high risk pregnancy, I also had gestational diabetes that I could not get under control. The consultant was most definitely nudging me towards a CS. I suspect she thought I was a walking emergency c section waiting to happen and it was better to plan it in.

Do you really think it’s that black and white or are you trying to be provocative? How would you decide on medical necessity? Eg if you you had damage and trauma from a vaginal birth with interventions/instruments, a c section for a second birth wouldn’t be necessary but very likely preferable!

Yes the demographic bit is interesting and I'd be interested to learn more about the reasons behind that. The study does cover both maternal and neonatal outcomes in the short-term, but not in the long-term.

'Women who planned CDMR were less likely to have adverse maternal (adjusted RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.57) and neonatal outcomes (adjusted RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.53) than those who planned vaginal deliveries.'

(And by neonatal outcomes it seems to be mainly more babies being admitted to NICU when born via vaginal v MCR section in that study, I couldn't see a breakdown of any more information than that).

What we do need is better education though, all women should be taught their bodies and fertility clearly not just the crappy minimal sex ed they get.

Hospitals should also have more options like birthing stools available and things as easy as better lighting etc... which are all scientifically proven to reduce complications.

I genuinely don't understand your post @Undkonm
I've had 2 VB. Both were short, fine and no pain relief.
Just saying.

It is also better for the baby's immune system and long term health to have vaginal births as they are given protection by the vaginal secretions.

The default is a vaginal birth with the right support, and a C-section is where there are complications either at the time, or if it's an elective C for existing reasons.

I have had two vaginal births so I can’t compare with a c-section. However, even though my first birth did not go to plan and was pretty traumatic I elected for a vaginal birth second time around. That has nothing to do with it being “the only real way to give birth”, a view I’ve never heard anyone express in real life. I chose it because, even with inductions, interventions, episiotomy, tearing, stitching and haemorrhaging I recovered so much more quickly than my friends who had c-sections.

The research I did suggested that a straightforward vaginal birth is better for both mother and baby. However, in going for that you have the risk of getting a non-straightforward birth or an emergency c-section which is worse than an elective c-section. So everyone just needs to pick which of the options they are most comfortable with and be allowed to make that choice.

The OP’s post seems to be dismissing those who have had a vaginal birth as conned by the system or brainwashed into thinking it’s the “only real way to give birth”. That narrative, which I have heard in real life from people who have had elective c-sections is just as damaging as saying those who have had c-sections haven’t really given birth. Everyone just needs to make their own decisions and leave others alone, there’s no need to artificially create two sides and attack each other.

By having access to medical care without fear of persecution or judgement if medical care is needed.

I had to fight and fight the midwives during my pregnancy about the birth I wanted - on the labour ward with access to epidural etc. They were absolutely adamant that I was having a normal pregnancy and was booked for the midwife-led unit "by default"! None of them listened to me or what I wanted.

Pregnancy suddenly became high risk and so I had to go to the labour ward, thankfully, and made use of all the pain relief options.

But for goodness sake, LISTEN to what the woman in front of you says she wants!

Thing is though, and I have no skin in the game because I am an adopter/have never given birth, when we all say "it's about cost" what that actually means is "it's cheaper because we have worked out the long term outcomes overall and it is better on average to have more vaginal births taking into account both the costs in hospital and the outcomes for mother and baby in the long term".
It's the same reason we don't have as many mammograms as in the US: it saves on expensive treatment for cancers that would grow slowly and not be life threatening, but also it prevents side effects (in the case of mammograms, the few cancers that are caused by increased exposure to x-ray).
The NHS is pretty good at working out how to balance costs (which really means illness) at a population level.

It would be great if we could join up the cost to education and to prison services e.g. not diagnosing dyslexia or ADHD, excluding pupils who could be helped, using evidence based teaching methods (great success with phonics but teachers are still wedded to brain gym, learning styles etc).

C-sections, yeah right. Had one. Could not shit for a month afterwards, scared to fart, scared to eat. Lucky I was not done in, lost so much blood, was anaemic for months. Horrendous recovery, incorrectly inserted catheter. Yeah, great choice, by all means.
Breast-feeding is abuse? Well, I am afraid one has to think of what is good for the child too, not just the woman. Btw, could not breastfeed after cs.

You're the one who's sounding stroppy.
Of course it's not black and white and the poster you quoted doesn't say that , do they?

It's individual.

Which is why I simply don't get the OP's post.

Women need to be treated as individuals.

The default is a VB unless there are compelling medical reasons for a C section.

The default and norm should obviously be to give birth naturally. It's a much faster recovery, better for the baby and mum. Better for breastfeeding.

Why on earth slicing our bodies practically on half in the "norm" in some countries is beyond me. If anything I believe its because the drs like the power and easy scheduling. I was told as much in a Catholic country- Dr's liked all their Saint days off so just arrange all the births around them.

Everyone I know with long term birth issues had a c section or a lot of prior medical issues.

When I had my first, the midwives were encouraging vaginal delivery because "it has more pros and less cons than a C-section". I kept saying "I want a C-section unless you can convince me otherwise". I got escalated to a senior obstetrician, who was able to talk me through a number of studies and the pros/cons of both, to help me build out my birth plan. After that discussion, I chose to go for a vaginal delivery with epidural, with the option to switch to a C-section if possible, if I changed my mind during labour.
The midwives generally go with rule of thumb recommendations - they don't necessarily have the level of research detail to explain why the rule of thumb is what it is. Always advocate for yourself and speak up. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Entitled women are really no better than any other mammals, eh? If we could make them give birth in a cardboard box under the stairs like the cat and we could save the NHS a fortune.

I've had both an emergency and and a planned section and both were awful and the recoveries from both were fucking awful, painful and months in duration.

Vaginal births are better for mum and better for baby.

Interestingly those I know with the worst recoveries had emergency sections.

I also know several people who had long term issues from vaginal deliveries gone wrong, including life long injuries for baby.

I know many people who had electives (including me and several other HCP's who work in maternity care other closely linked areas) and no issues at all. It's becoming a norm because the system is broken and for those in the know a planned section is currently the safest option.

I support choice, but if you want to make this choice, you should at least learn about the risks to your child.

www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-10831-y

@Undkonm

the recovery can be extremely different between an elective and emergency

The recovery from my elective was far, far worse than the emergency including 5 days on the high dependency ward, wound infections and lots more gore.

My three CS children have always had really robust health. It was a godsend as two full-time working parents with no plan B other than us. They didn't even seem to get colds or V&D like other children did, and none ever had an ear infection. I breastfed all three.

My sister bf her two as well, also c/sections, and they were always down with some or other bug! I think a lot of it is just down to luck really.

That last sentence, are you saying elective sections (no medical reason) shouldn’t exist?

”stroppy”…! odd response.

@Undkonm This toxic narrative that birth is only birth if you give birth vaginally is another abuse of women.

How did women give birth in the days before modern surgery? How well do you think Caesarean births went in the days before antibiotic prophylaxis and anaesthesia?