I dont know if this is the same article but in yesterdays DM p25 (sorry cannot link) is an article headed "Hard up hospitals tell women they cant choose a cs"
"They have launched the crackdown on women who are too posh to push" - I did not think that cs had ever been handed out freely and easily by the NHS and women for whom the operation was a "lifestyle" choice paid privately.
It goes on to say that health experts argue that cs mothers would find it harder to bond with their baby but surely any mother that has suffered a traumatic birth whether cs or vb may find this an issue?
The article then states that mothers groups argue that women opt for planned cs to avoid the trauma of of an emergency cs and to reduce risks of post natal conditions such as incontinence. Vicky Cook a consultant ob and gynae is quoted as as saying that she had two elective cs as she had seen so many patients forced to have emergency cs. Her specialist area is urinary incontinence and she says "there can be no doubt that childbirth does cause long-term problems in some women".
Dr Paul Armstrong is quoted as saying that "just as a woman has a right to choose home birth or other non interventionist techniques so she should have a right to choose a cs".
The over riding issue seems to be cost but no-one seems to factor in the cost of repair ops for women who are injured by vb or the psychological problems that also require treatment. Also the cost of ops for incontinence caused by vb.
There has been discussion before about the obsession the WHO has with cs rates and no one seems to be able to find out their rational behind it. They do not seem to offer guidelines say for tears that only, for example, 1% of women should suffer from these or only 2% of women should have forceps used etc.
The Sunday Times also had this item on the front page just on case anyone thinks that this just a DM story.