This article has me fuming....thoughts?

[PrincessZ]

I just read this article and I am so shocked at how they can categorically ban cesarean sections!
www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2028443/Hospitals-ban-pregnant-women-having-c-sections-cost-cutting-move.html?ITO=google_news_rss_feed

I'm pregnant and I was going to ask for a cesarean. Reading this article has made me lose all hope.

I think princessz is a journalist.

"I think it's quite inflammatory to imply that women who have had ELCS have missed out on a life-changing experience"

But I'm afraid I do think that, and many other people do too after going through labour. It called on all my powers of endurance and stoicism, and courage and optimism. I found labour absolutely gruelling and agonising and had to reach down into myself to find the strength to go on. I'm a wimp ordinarily and never knew I had it in me to cope with so much. Nothing about it was easy. And I think that's why I came away with a massive sense of achievement.

Going through that ordeal three times with DH at my side was also very special - the help he gave me. I think it deepened our relationship and changed the way he saw me too - he came away with more respect for me and for women in general.

"Having a baby remains one of the biggest life changing experiences/rite of passage no matter how it comes out; we associate that with our own birth experiences, naturally."

Well of course the pregnancy and becoming a parent are the most profound and life-changing things, and I don't think anyone who talks about what they've got spiritually or emotionally from the experience of going through labour would believe that it somehow trumps the making of a new life and becoming a family. But they don't have to be exclusive. To many of us the experience of labour IS a crucial life experience that changes the way we see ourselves.

"To imply that the crucial or life changing element is in the labour process is a little closed-minded, IMO. "

No - not the life changing element, but a life changing element.

The purpose of labour is to get the baby out. That's it. It's not a competition and there are no awards. Some people feel empowered, others feel shattered. Some end up with a graze, others with incontinence.

There are no guarantees it will go well or bad, especially when it's your first.

So, please, Spudulica tone it down a bit because as much as I appreciate your passion for homebirths you actually sound so actively against hospital births and CS that it's off-putting. You may scare a first timer and I'm sure you don't want that.

Also, your life changing is not my life changing, we all feel and experience things differently and you may have statistical and anecdotal evidence but you're a mother like many of us and not a health pro. In fact, maybe you should train as a midwife, you clearly have the enthusiasm for it but meanwhile accept that it's not just your opinions that are valid. An example: you mention earlier that most women that you know were not in horrid pain at 2 cm dilated and quite enjoyed it. Well, I was! I was almost screaming at only 1 and that may be related to the fact that despite my waters breaking I still needed to be induced.

Yes, I had syntocinon. Thank God. Yes, I had an epidural, it stopped me panicking and made the whole process so much more pleasurable.

Most importantly, I got my little boy alive and well in my arms and that was all it was about.

I understand what you're saying, spudulika- that was the way it was for you, and is for many women. But I experienced all of those things you describe when I had my DD.

To assume that an ELCS is missing those elements by virtue of being an ELCS is wrong. It may not contain those experiences, but equally it may; much like VB.

The upshot of it is that we both had really positive birth experiences, even though they involved wholly different processes. That is a Good Thing. Surely it indicates that women should be allowed to have more choice and control over the way in which they give birth?

I had an EMCS with my 2nd, and will be having an ELCS with this one IF it doesn't come early.
This was not an easy decision to make for me, having had a VB that went very well apart from needing an MROP in theatre, I went into my 2nd birth ignorant to what could go wrong.
My fear is not in labouring naturally at all, it is the knowlegde of now knowing what can go wrong.
My DS became distressed after 3 and half hours of pushing and I was exhausted after a number of internals and a scan I was told it would come but he was stuck on my pelvis I just had to keep pushing.
Eventually a Consultant arrived and confirmed he was in fact not going to come as he was brow. I was rushed off for an EMCS I had a spinal block that failed to numb my torso so I felt them cutting and was quickly knocked out. My son was severely bruised from the top of his forhead to his lip, I have pictures of him straight after birth but I can't look at them as I feel guilty that I didn't realised there was a problem and my continuing to push left him with those bruises.
Anyway my point there is one honestly.
Swaying me to the ELCS is the time they have before the procedure to check and make sure the spinal (or as I will have this time if ELCS combined spinal and epidural) has worked. I could not stand the thought of having another EMCS that could result in the same scenario and whilst some people may think once the baby arrives you forget all the bad stuff I personally can't forget how painful it was when they started cutting and frightened it made me feel.
However if they had said you can not have an ELCS on the NHS I would not have gone private for one, so I would have had to face this fear and get on with it. Which is still a probability due to my tendancy not to go full term and to progress very quickly. Can only get a 39 weeks ELCS.

Does anyone know whether this 'new' policy affects VBACs?

I was under the impression that you cannot be compelled to have a VBAC due to the increased risk of uterine rupture...

Nunnie. as far as i know if you have an elcs scheduled, then even if you go into labour early then, if it is possible they will still do a cs. i would talk to your consultant or MW about the possibility of going into labour early.

The scheduling of cs at 39 weeks, is very important, because of the risk of breathing difficulties if cs are done earlier.

Not sure but my local hospital are very pro VBAC and have said there is no medical need for me to have an ELCS however have said it is my choice. If I labour early then I am having to agree to a trial labour but will be monitored throughout and they have strict policies in place to aid in the prevention of unterine rupture.

Oh I wasn't complaining about the 39 week thing I totally understand why they don't do them sooner.
The reason they won't do an Section if I arrive in labour is because I progress from stage 1 to 2 very quickly and it would become an EMCS (which scares me to death) and there is a possibilty if I am progressing well then it will be too late to do a section and it would be safer to continue naturally if progressing well.
Which again I understand and am happy with, just petrified of the not progressing well and another EMCS.

Metalelephant - it's hurtful you saying 'the purpose of labour is getting the baby out' as though somehow what I said implied otherwise. I can't imagine you'd be so patronising or dismissive in response to someone talking passionately about any other life experience. Horrible, and bitchy. I think I need to step away from this thread.

Don't go spudulika- you and I have very different ideas about birth, and I have thoroughly enjoyed discussing them with you. It's not often we get to discuss such issues on here without it descending into chaos, as it is such an emotive subject for all of us.

However, this thread has- for the main part- been informative and interesting, and I think we're doing really well

It's a bit unfair to call my comment bitchy spudulica, I had no such intention. As I said I appreciate your passion, but I think you exaggerate some of your points. If you feel that's bitchy, it's your right but I don't see it that way at all.

Now I must run to the ob's appointment, so will catch up later.

tethers i did say i didn't mean that everyone should share my view point.... All of womenkind in agreement! That would be unnaturait

What i'm trying to express is that i think birth could be a much more positive experience for many low risk women.

I take on board that a cs can be empowering too.

But in a low risk pg where vb carries the fewest risks i think more could be done to help women have experiences like spud and i were lucky to have. We know there is a statistical link between painrelief and intervention. We also know more first timers have more pain relief (and therefore intervention) but that they may go on to have neither in subsequent labours. I can't help but think some of those women could, with better support, have avoided pain relief and therefore intervention and so felt better about the birth. I know there is a lot of statistical extrapolation there, but it ties in with some of my friends personal experiences, so i'm sure is true of others.

I am not, ever ever ever talking about denying women pain relief. But supporting women who want to try without, and empowering women to know it is a possibility if they want to persue it.

I think there is also a lot to be done to ensure births requiring more intervention are also positive

I know it doesn't matter as much to everyone as it does to me...but if you want kids you probably have to give birth to them one way or another and it'd be good if that could be a good thing rather than a bad one.

"but if you want kids you probably have to give birth to them one way or another"

Probably? I am thinking you will have to give birth to them one way or another

I do feel that I missed out on a life changing experience, and I had an assisted VB. ARM at 11.30am, drip hung at just after 12 noon, epi in at 4pm ("you won' manage the pain without an epidural dearie") and forceps delivery with full spinal at midnight. I didn't really "give birth" to my DD any more than if I had had a caesarian.

I do think there is a total fundamental difference between ELCS following a problematic first birth (whether that be EMCS or a difficult VB) or for medical reasons (breech or large baby/ SPD) and an ELCS for reasons of fear or concerns about the state of your nether regions afterwards.

At the risk of repeating myself tho, I think we need to get away from this idea that one is good and one is bad. I find it a bit depressing that anyone would think they had "failed" if they have had a CS. Doesn't the WHO reckon that at least one in ten births NEEDS to be a section to save the life of the mother or child?

I do think also tho that we live in a culture where childbirth is discussed as something scary and painful, new mothers compete to see who has the "worst" bs and there are no positive images/ stories of childbirth. That contributes to the fear. I also think (and have read) that fear exacerbates the pain, so it's a vicious circle. I agree that more help and support should be given to women who don't want to use pain releif or who are happy to limit it to gas and air - the way to manage this is for every expectant mother to have dedicated one to one midwife care during labour, not to be left to labour alone until they are crying out for an epidural.

Let's throw some NHS money at the midwife population rather than letting women with no real need have ELCSs

I don't think it's particually true that culturally we discuss childbirth as scarey or painful when the opposite is often true that people discuss vaginally birth as 'life changing' and a spiritual experience and all the rest of it and then if that bed of roses doesn't happen then women feel like they have 'failed'. I remember when i had my first, which was a failed instrumental ending ina emergency section, I was very ill, baby (now very disabled) was in scbu for days and people within my own family refered to me as 'too posh to push' and 12 years on i am still angry about it!:o

OP has disappeared anyway - do you think she has enough material for her article?

most probably :o

But why is fear of a VB different to fear of a CS? We do not make all of our life decisions based on statistical evidence, and this thread alone ahs raised the question of how statistics can be interpreted. For example Moon, your assertion that pain relief results in further intervention is questionable if we interpret the statistical link to indicate that pain relief is more prevalent in births which require intervention. There is (please correct me if I'm wrong BTW) no direct causal link between pain relief and increased intervention- just evidence that the incidence of one is higher when the other is present IYSWIM...

I also think that concern about the state of our 'nether regions' (love that expression ) is completely valid, and shouldn't be written off as a shallow concern. In France, I believe that physiotherapy after giving birth is standard practice.

I had an emergency CS after 48 hours of labour. Not sure if I'm having any more DC's (no spring chicken and have a degree to finish, and live in a one-bed flat) BUT after the 48 hrs of farting about with countless medical staff, being moved ward, given drips of this, that and the other, if I did it again I'd go with an elective CS. That way I'd know what was going to happen and when.
Not got much help lined up - most family are too old, but I coped before...

Angry wee thing, isn't she? And do people really start panicking about tearing at 3w pg? I would've either not known I was pg yet or been in denial about having to give birth at all at that point.

Red, your position is perfectly understandable to anyone I would have thought. The OP's isn't

As it is so long I have not read every single bit of the thread so sorry if something like this has already come up, but if a weighing up of risks of VB versus CS is the issue - I believe OP wants a CS primarily due to the risks of tearing, incontinence etc that are greater with a VB, I would like to offer my experience to the pot.

I have had 2 VB's and I have torn badly both times, the second being very close to the dreaded 4th degree tear. I have recovered completely both times very quickly with no negative after affects.

My SIL on the other hand had her 4th DC a few months before my DS2 was born, she had a CS and the doctors managed to "nick" her bladder during surgery. She had to go back in for surgery later and whilst repairing her the doctors actually realised that the "nick" was 5CM WIDE!!! She more or less missed out on the first few weeks of her baby being born as she was in and out of hospital, I think her bladder has now recovered but there was a huge chance that she would end up with permanent incontinence but more importantly she will never get back those first few weeks that should have been spent bonding with her baby.

I know that the tears that I had could have been worse and I may not have recovered as well - I am very lucky. And I know that SIL's case is rare, but it is one of the reasons why I would be a million times more scared of choosing to have surgery than of giving birth vaginally, and don't assume that you are not at risk from incontinence or even worse complications.

I also think that concern about the state of our 'nether regions' (love that expression ) is completely valid, and shouldn't be written off as a shallow concern.

Totally agree with this.

gemjar, I don't think it is that rare for your bladder to be cut on your 3rd or 4th c section actually