to think that some MNers are just a tweensy bit biased when it comes to elective CS?

[youcannotbeserious]

Why is it, when anyone ever posts that they want an elective CS / considering going private, LOTS of MNers start going on about the risks (I appreciate that they exist and, to be fair, they are explained in detail by the consultant and you have to sign a waiver so you are fully aware of them) and needing to be in an NHS hospital 'just in case' and you wouldn't want to be in one of those pesky private hospitals, but the same never gets said for home births which, as far as I can see, must have a reasonably equal risk of needing to go to transfer to a hospital?

Why is it that Elec. CSs are so frowned upon?

I'm genuinely curious - I had to defend my 'birth plan' several times here on MN - and I don't honestly see why it's so emotive... Should I run for it now?

What? Mumsnetters biased? How very dare you!

Many Mumsnetters are downright blinkered and judgmental. Don't sell them short.

As for the elective C-section - it's nobody's business except yours and your consultant's. They will advise you according to their in depth knowledge and professional judgment.

You cannot say vb is safer & quicker recovery than ec.

for many, yes, but for many it isn't. I had EMC ( awful recovery due wholly down to atrocious pn care).

2 VBACs - lots of tearing, stiching, damage. Awful & lengthy recovery, great pn care, just too much damage. Couldn't sit for weeeks, unbelievable pain & stilll not 'right' - never will be.

3 weeks ago had Elective .

i am so pleased I did this. The pain in the 2 days after was unreal, but hard to separate which was section pain & which were after pains. But after only a week I was pain-free, really had to force myself to take it easy. Really, the best recovery of the 4 births, and I'm old now too. VB took over 9 months to recover from, and never will totally. el took a week.

some are licky to have good vb. many are not

Youcannotbeserious, I am totally biased when it comes to elective section, and yes, I would try to encourage and support a women to avoid one, but....

I'd defend her right to the death if she decided she wanted one for very good reason, including and not limited to, pyschological reasons and valid medical reasons.

A woman's mental wellbeing around the time of childbirth is paramount. Sometimes, I suppose I want to try to help woman feel more positively about trying for a VB BUT would always support her decision if she decided that no, she's considered it but it was not for her.

As a VBACer, many women have to be very single minded about planning for and achieving a VBAC, so I suppose that shows a lot in their attitude. Sorry

can i ask a question?
I keep hearing again and again on MN that a home birth is safer than a hospital birth. Is that because in order to be allowed to have a home birth you have to be low risk?

Do the studies actually compare low risk hospital births to home births which are all low risk? OR are all hospital births included? If the latter is true, it cannot be a fair comparison.

I am so fed up of people saying 'oh- you poor thing' when i tell them i had a c section. Truth is, it is the only part of my labour that went well. who knows, i may have had a fabulous VB with a competent MW, but as i previously mentioned, i sadly think that the standard of MWs is hugely variable.

suey2, as I'm sure someone else has said by now, studied compare low risk women intennded place of birth hospital, with low risk women, intended place of birth home.

Note, women who intend to give birth at home, but who are trabsferred to hosp for whastever reason, including complications, are in the homebirth set.

Women who accidently give birth at home, but were booked for hospital, are not included (or are included in the hospital set, I'm not certain, think it depends on study)

Hoembirth still comes out with fewer complications than hosp.

However, it's not a fully random selection; women choose their place to give birth, it's not assigned as it would be in a fully randomised trial. No one can't rule out personality type causal factors (though hard to imagine what they are)

I had an elective section on the private wing of a big NHS hospital for my first baby. After going through five gruelling and disaster-filled years of fertility treatment to get pregnant in the first place, I was too worried about things going wrong to even contemplate a natural birth - I was convinced the baby would be starved of oxygen or something, and that I would end up with a fourth degree tear.

My section was an absolutely fantastic experience - even better than I'd dared hope, after reading all the horror stories about sections, particularly on mumsnet. It was calm, quick, and I had a lovely calm baby with no breathing problems (she cried as she was lifted out of me) and no birth trauma. Five days after the operation I was up and down our three storey house with no problems at all - only a bit more slowly than usual. Listening to the birth stories in our NCT group, it's clear I had one of the best birth experiences.

My baby actually ended up being almost nine pounds in weight and in the back to back position, and so it seems my fears about a difficult birth were justified.

The experience of going through natural labour was never remotely important to me. I just wanted a healthy baby, and If I am ever lucky enough to get pregnant again I will be signing up for another elective section in a heartbeat. This site does seem to be biased against sections, which in my opinion is a shame, as there are many positive experiences.

Maybe I am a bit too posh to push. I really don't care!

I think a sucessful vbac comes out top in terms of risks, recovery, expense etc. BUT a crash section is horrendously risky. I am going for an elective this time as really do not want to face the 30% risk of a crash section

I am ashamed to say this but I had an emergency Caesarian, and compared to my vaginal delivery it was lovely.

Shorter recovery time, more help at the hospital, less exhausted, much less baby blues, not so much pain afterwards, much less blood loss, easier to establish breast feeding. But then my vaginal birth experience was pretty grim. So you can't really compare. I am sure there is nothing typical about my experience.

But my feeling was that the doctors were really reluctant to give me a Caesarian and when it became necessary because ds was in distress they pretty well apologised to me for suggesting such a thing. I put on a brave face and said nothing...

The very few women I have known who have had elective Caesarians have had them for sound medical reasons (and I would count extreme phobia in this category). They've known the risks and opted for the least risky choice in their position.

I was booked for an elective cs for No2 as had crash section for No1 which resulted in him being severely brain damaged.

As it turned out went into prem labour with No 2 so the "elective" became an "emergency" anyway.

I don't think it's approp. to criticise anyone for their birth choices.

I found out in recent years that the reason my Dad is an only child is that his Mum was traumatised by her vaginal birth experience and couldn't face the thought of going through it again.

Apparently, she told this cheering tale to her DIL to entertain her during her first pregnancy

hamandhigh on Thu 26-Jun-08 23:15:16
'Far safer birth and quicker recovery with VB'

Speak for yourself, my dear. Dd is 11 and I still get a twinge from the scars in cold weather.

youcannot be serious. Agree with you.

Also agree with suey2 and gangle further down about the risks of VB not being fully explained.

I have had 2 CS, one crash and second elective from which I recovered quickly and uneventfully. There is something to be said for having escaped any perineum trauma or incontinence.

As compared to other people I know (a remarkably high proportion of first time mothers) who have had very traumatic forceps vaginal births with permanent damage to their bits, one of whom is not considering any more children.

I'm definitely having an elective cs if I get pregnant again. basically, I won't get pregnant unless I can be sure that I can have one. Giving birth to ds was horrific, the pain, the retained placenta, the tear, the surgery, losing 3 pints of blood.

If that's a "natural" birth I'll take my chances under the knife thanks.

hamandhigh on Thu 26-Jun-08 23:15:16
'Far safer birth and quicker recovery with VB'

See that's the thing i'm talking about, that may or may not be the average, but it's hardly helpful for individual circumstances, is it?

Believe me, i am not knocking anyone who wants a VB, but why when a woman says 'I'm considering a CS' is she immediately hit with all this emotional cobblers about the 'risks' associated with CS? As far as I can see, the risks associated with CS are far better explained than the complications which may occur with VB..

that's all. FWIW, I had a doula, who went through all of the possible options with me and I think if it's possible to employ a doula then it's probably the best way to ensure you choose the right birth plan for you.

Hi guys, am totally new to this ( first post ) but have been reading this thread and just wanted to say that having a cs is nothing to be ashamed of. I had an emergency cs with my DD1 and felt awful ( and was made to feel awful )that i hadn't 'managed to do it properly' so much so that when i had my second i was totally determined to have a VBAC, which i did without any problems. But the birth of my first will always be tainted by the comments i got from a few selected friends and my not too pleasant SIL. As long as there's a healthy baby and a happy mum at the end surely that's the main thing?

thanks notanexcitingname. Can you tell me what they deem 'complications': i mean does every tear that is stitched count the same as a death?

I haven't read the thread, but agree with OP. When someone posts a thread about wanting an elective section, there is a stampede of pro-vagnial birth propoganda. I say "propoganda" because some of what is preeched is not medical fact (i.e. you won't be able to breastfeed, you can't drive for 6 weeks, you can only have two sections in your life). These things are simply not true.

But, check out the home birth threads and no one is allowed to mention the risks of having a baby where there are no medical facilities.

Is that true about private hospitals not having an ICU? Does this mean no neo natal unit either?

Yes, I think that is true. I've never gone private so can't speak from experience.

ive had 3 cs.1 emergency after however long labour,failed vontouse and failed forceps.put to sleep et viola a dd!,then 1 elective which was all fine and lovely year later.then another elective 4.5 years later-still wonderful(infact probably nicest of them all experience wise and best recovery oddly!)but i had tear to bladder due to scar tissue.ive not had any mners saying anything bad about having cs!ive had nothing but support.id love a 4th but am unsure at the moment although consultant says ok.(and dh obviously )and ive lots of lovely advice from mners!

Athene - is the no driving for 6 weeks not true after a c- section?

athene-you said ' I say "propoganda" because some of what is preeched is not medical fact (i.e. you won't be able to breastfeed, you can't drive for 6 weeks, you can only have two sections in your life). These things are simply not true.'

so what is true and what are the facts?im genuinly interested,not argueing btw

i checked with my insurance company- i was ok to drive straight away after my cs. My friend (a consultant pathologist) has had 4 elective CSs. I am still BF my 6 month old baby and have bf her since the day she was born.

I had different insurance companies when I had my two sections. Both of them said it was fine to drive whenever I felt up to it. They said there were no special rules for caesareans and one of them said she had never heard of such a thing.

On very very rare occassion I have seen a MNer type that her insurance comapny did have a 6 week rule. So check with your insurance, but you are probably fine when you feel well enough to do an emergency stop.