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.

Ok I've got you!.....I'm trying to think of one

I was merely commenting on the suggestion by the OP that the NHS should offer optional CS because they are freely available in Canada. I am not sure that is true anyway (and different Canadian provinces probably have different rules as there is no 'national' HS in Canada) but what I know for sure is that there is significantly lower CS, forceps and ventouse rates in Canada. Therefore the Canadian health system does not have to cope with the same costs pressure as the NHS on this specific issue (I am not commenting on their respective budgets as a whole). It would also suggest that Canadian women do not routinely ask for CSs for non medical reasons.

Ah, I see. But, assuming ELCS are available to all Canadian women, could it not also be indicative of them choosing other options? So access to caesareans might not necessarily lead to any significant increase in them being performed?

I have no idea what the situation in Canada actually is, it's just another way the (as yet fictional) stats could be read.

Oh, and I don't really have an opinion on whether an ELCS for non medical reasons is a 'valid birth option'.

"but I'm trying to ascertain if there is a reason other than cost as to why an ELCS shouldn't be a valid birth option. Or perhaps cost is the only factor?"

It's complicated isn't it, because we can't just look at the (very good) outcomes for first c/s and draw our conclusions about the viability from there. We need to assess the impact of a first c/s on a woman's reproductive health over 2 or 3 pregnancies, as this is the normal family size in the UK.

I'd be very interested in seeing comparisons for health outcomes for women between vb and cs over the whole of their reproductive life, not just comparing an elective c/s for a first birth (which is usually uncomplicated) with a vb for a first birth (which is much more likely to be complicated and end in emc than subsequent deliveries).

...not to mention the population of Canada is half of that in the UK.

As Spud says. I imagine the age and general of the mother would also have a large impact on how well she recovered.

general health*

I am personally convinced that the availability of epidurals, and in particular of early epidurals (eg at 2 cm or less) actually decreases the EMCS rate in Canada, as women are not left in pain for hours and get to delivery more rested and able to push. There is also less of a 'need' for ELCS as women know they will be adequately supported with pain relief while in labour. But I don't have data to back this up, just dozens of friends, sisters, former colleagues, etc who all think the way we have it here ( with no epi until 3 cm, if at all available) is inhumane and medieval.

Well I don't want another vbac or a cs... There has to be a nicer way of having a baby in this day and age surely?

Yes Peter, just in another country

I was v disappointed when I found out that stork didn't exist..

Sorry just to jump back to some points made earlier.

I have had 2nd and 3rd degree tears, and suffered double incontinence as a result. I had an elcs for my 3rd child.

The cs was by far the worst of the 3 births, my gp diagnosed post traumatic distress as a consequence of the birth. I felt brutalised and still feel very weird about my body as a result.

You can research and 'prepare' as much as you want, but I don't think it will ever compare to the reality.

I know that lots of people have wonderful cs's and a good recovery, but i just wanted to point out that this is not always the case.

It's clear that there needs to be a lot more research on this- good points about the effect on a woman's reproductive life and the impact of available epidurals.

I also think we need a campaign for the stork to become a valid birth option

Just want to say, I have no clue what most of you are talking about.
If you think I'm a troll, why post?

Anyway, I'm sure some people have bad cesarean experiences, but I'm willing to cope with that scenario.
I cannot even think about coping with a forceps birth, incontinence, or tears and grazes. Or a messed up pelvic floor.
So as long as I am paying, I feel like I can pick my risks.

This whole debate about which is better will go on forever, and I'll never agree with those who say a cesarean is evil and VB is amazing.

I disagree and always have, always will.

I've always known I want a cesarean and I'm willing to even be in debt to pay for one.
If only I could find a private doctor!
Any advice on how I can ask my GP for a private referral? Should I say I want to go private because I want a cesarean? Or should I not offer a reason?

I had a VB with keilland (sp?) forceps and a 1cm episiotomy that healed within the week. I have suffered mild stress incontinence (not enough to affect my daily life at all, only an issue when I go for a long run and since corrected by physiotherapy).

I had an epidural from 3/4cm as I was induced due to obstetric cholestasis.

I remember in my antenatal classes the whole class of first time mums being obsessed with not having an epi or tearing, and all the midwives and HVs falling about saying "that'll be the least of your worries"

A ELCS where it is not required is an unnecessary expense and in the case of this OP, it would seem it is as much a cosmetic request as asking for a boob job on the NHS. I don't want my hard earned cash going on ELCS for a bunch of lily livered vain girls who don't want to ruin their "fanjo".

On the other hand I think it extremely important that where a c section is INDICATED (not just required, some element of forethought and consultation is required too) that cost shouldn't come into it.

Also I think the last thing women need is yet more guilt inducing tosh about differing birth methods affecting bonding with babies etc. One isn't "better" than the other, but major surgery shouldn't be a matter of whim, at least not when the state is paying for it.

One point that hasn't been made is that a lot of women I know who have had C sections have a caesarian "overhang" that they can't get rid of. Far worse IMHO than a 1cm cut :wink:

The Portland in London is the hospital that Posh used - I guess she had a tummy tuck at the same time. Not sure how much that would run to tho.

Its not often im mean to another poster but princessz i think you are being a bit of a princess on this one.

tbh I think a lot of this is moot Princess, I do think you have a psychological issue with birth anyway so might even get one on the NHS!

The cost of a private birth
Private maternity care is quite expensive. For example, a first birth at the Portland Hospital in London costs £2,880 for a normal delivery and £3,790 for an elective caesarean for the first 24 hours of care, including the delivery. Additional nights in a standard room cost around £1000. You also have to allow for the fees charged by your private consultant obstetrician, which might be £3,000 to £4,000. So, in total, a private birth at a hospital such as the Portland could cost £7,500 to £10,000. There will be some saving if you opt for a "Midwife led Delivery Service" or "Midwife Led Care". In this instance, you will still have a named obstetrician, but he or she will see you less often, and the birth may be supported by an on-call Consultant Obstetrician.

I should have used quote above but it gives an idea of costs.

If NHS won't allow me to have a CS(and I'm not saying that is unfair exactly)
then I'll have to go private won't I?
We are so used to free healthcare, we forget that people in most other countries pay for everything themselves. Just because the concept of paying for healthcare is alien to us, that doesn't mean it is wrong or strange.

Nor does it btw, make me a "princess".

I think women have a tendency to be a bit bitter and unsympathetic towards other women. They seem to feel that if they went through a bad experience and the trauma of birth, then why should anyone else escape it?

I don't think the women who ask for cesareans think it is an easy option, I think it is the women who call them "fragile princesses" for asking for one who think it is an easy way out.

There is nothing fragile about either mode of delivery. You just have to pick the lesser of two evils.

Oh and lily livered?!
I am VOLUNTEERING to have my abdomen sliced open. Thats not lily livered.

Worrying about incontinence and 4th degree tears is not "vain".
Worrying about stretch marks might be vain, but not this.

Sorry, your logic FAILS.

Aw, it was all in danger of getting all reasonable for a minute there

The link scatterchasse (?) posted 2 pages ago links to a consultant gynae based in Sheffield- and quoting appointments to be made at the Thornbury Hospital. So that may be your nearest hospital for private CS. But I cannot believe Manchester does not have one. The Thornbury has a good rep and is very swish.

I can see that you want a CS.
I had 3 VB- no huge probs but a few stitches with first. Definitely not got a fanjo suitable for photography of the intimate kind. But not sure if that is my age and all the sex I have had or the births. If it is preserving your fanjo for 'being seen' in whatever context, then I get you, but I think there's more to life PrincessZ.
You sound very young....
not meant to be an insult btw.
Good luck

I'm 35.

There is a LOT more to life. Thats why I don't want to spend it getting botched episiotomies repaired(they seem incapable of getting it right the first time), or having surgery to fix incontinence or worse still a colorectal fistula.

How does that make me fragile or young?

I checked on google. Manchester has private hospitals but none have a Labour and Delivery facility. there is only early pregnancy care.

I'll check Sheffield though.Thanks for the suggestion!