The Observer's health editor says women ought to have C-sections instead of vaginal delivery.

[dizietsma]

\link{http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/news/0,,1723873,00.html\link to article}

I'm appalled. I haven't read it all the way through yet, but you can bet your bottom dollar I'll be writing to the Observer to complain about this shocking and irresponsible opinion piece.

C-sections aren't safe, no surgery is safe! As someone who has pre-op'd thousands of women before surgery you have to discuss the pro's as well as the con's .. if you don't you expose yourself as a health care professional to litigation which is why i mentioned informed consent... knowing what you are getting yourself into.. so to speak! I must say our bodies are designed to birth vaginally, it is what women have done for eons... Nothing as far as life is concerned is safe and i know of no research report that has concluded that c-section births result in a lower mortality rate for both mum and baby than vaginal births nor that a mother will experience less complications post natally if she has a c-section!
To acclaim that a c-section is better for you and that is how we should all have babies is a big statement to make and this is where the choice bit comes in.
Also how can a c-section be 'good for you', for someone who is due to have a third LSCS.. even i know that from basic common sense it is not 'good for me'.. an apple a day is supposed to be good for you! It's not good for you, well not in the same way as having major surgery to remove a cancerous growth. You have scar tissue where you may not have needed scar tissue you have a uterine weakness which poses problems for susequent pregnancies, you exposed yourself to the complications of reduced mobility post surgery, you are at an increased risk of uterine haemorrhage... blah blah blah.i could bore you to death with the risks associated with surgery.. all that in the know... all that risk.... so even though i am a choice advocate and even though i have chosen to go through a 3rd LSCS i certainly DO NOT agree that it is good for anyone and we all should have one!
I would welcome a nice link to a peice of research which claims what she stated. then i will shut up! and consider re-training!!!!!!!!!

Absolutely Blueshoes!! Mee too. My induction was not an informed choice either. And I too headed for crash section after fetal distress.

Well over enthusiastic induction is a whole other ball game and increases the risk of intervention by a lot.

I suspect views on it are polarised as you can only go on your own experiences and mine were things of beauty and peace and... safety :)

no not extinct - the safety differences are too small. I still think the fundamental problem is how you look at the figures. People don't actually choose between elective cs and vaginal birth (assumng they have a choice, which of course most don't), but between elective cs and 'vaginal birth with a small risk of emergency cs'. Unless controlled studies are done, who is to say which is safer? A lot of the figures you see lump all cs's in together (the NICE report is an example) and that just further muddies the waters.
I didn't object to the report - I think it was wrong to suggest everyone must have a cs, but given that most at this point in time can't - if it helps move to the situation where more have the choice (and hopefully if proper studies are done, an informed choice) then I don't hold a few slightly extreme comments against them.

research into medical/surgical statistics can ultimately prove what the person setting out to do the research wants them to prove! They should never be taken as conclusive. Only if the techniques can be tried and tested to the exact specifications in the same controlled manner elsewhere, then the results maybe quantifiable and relied upon. That is something that we were taught that NICE represented as they are supposed to be an independant body seperate to the NHS. They encourage research based practice to prevent litigation. That does NOT mean that all women should have a c-section from the beginning. Demographically c-section rates are higher in other areas of the country than some and the reasons encompass masses of differentials...
which makes conclusive findings as to what is less risky so very difficult to prove.

health and well being of mum and baby at that particular moment in time is what is important however it occurs!

The fact still remains that c sections are not the way we should be born. It is not good for the baby (and I believe this quite strongly), they are at much greater risk post section. Urgo, IMO, to try for a vaginal birth in the first instance.

I feel babies should come out when they are ready to, although I understand that sometimes they don't do this willingly! and other methods are required. But if induction is always such a disaster, why would that be the default method? An emergency C section would be more expensive and more risky for both mother and baby. If inductions were all bad, and elective c section would be offered.

I don't understand why people seem to think the NHS is out to make them suffer. That certainly isn't the point of my role, and I'd be very surprised if it any health proffessional would feel that way.

A C section is major surgery, and in the same way that I think people undergoing plastic surgery purely for vanity, those opting to have it are burying their head in the sand.

There are a great many risks, side effects and complications. Of course, there are some with vaginal births too. But in all forms of nature there are fatalities during the birth process. All this results from us trying (naturally) to overcome this fact. But the vast majority do not.

To prescribe an elective section to all mothers to be, would be in many ways similar to removing everybody's appendix - 'Well you don't need this organ, and there is a slight possibility that at some point in the future it may cause you to become very unwell and die. So we will do surgery now, while you are well, rather than flooded with infection to save any possibility of this happening. Of course, there it is likely that your appendix will remain perfectly healthy and we have put you through surgery for absolutely no reason, but we'd rather take the chance on you now.'

You'd all think that was crazy wouldn't you?

I have just scanned through this thread and I am really disgusted on what some you have to say about c-sections. Both my children were born with c-sections and I had a terrific experience with their births and was up and about only a few hours after the procedure. I believe that it is my body and that I do have a choice regarding which way it should be "hammered" when my children are born. Not one of them would ever be asked whether they were born naturally or not. They are just as normal as any other child and have been since they were born. Shame on some of you who clearly didn't have the experience of a c-section.

I had three vaginal births and they weren't really beautiful experiences (lackadaisical midwives, grubby hospital), but at least I was out of there quickly - within a few hours with DSs 2 and 3 - and resumed normal service in a couple of days. Presumably as well as the risks associated with any surgical procedure you're more susceptible to MRSA and similar nasties if you're laid up in hospital with a sizeable wound?

It seems strange that C-sections are being positioned as the safe and "easy way out", when in most cases vaginal delivery is just that. Perhaps it would take away some of the value judgements around the argument by coining a phrase which embodies this to counter "too posh to push", like "too nervous for the knife" or "too idle for incision".

Response to the MRSA comment.......same applies to a gloved hand prodding about in your vaginal as far as MRSA is concerned! where there is a way in for this bug it will find it.... just because the midwife or obstetrician has a pair of gloves on to examine you 'down below' doesn't mean you will not get it. MRSA is predominantly carried in the nostrils and transfers just as readily into a fresh incision scar externally as it would internally. One in eight people have a dormant colony of this bug in their nasal passgeway, if it finds its way into an environment which it likes it will cause problems. So no greater risk either way! plus a caesar birth has antibiotic cover a vaginal birth doesn't.
The journalist made a sweeping statement in her article one which is her opinion from the research she did into which method of birth carries a lesser risk, i would have thought that she would have used a better choice of words to clarify her own personal conclusion seeing as she writes for a well known respected newspaper. it reads very poor and hops from one point to the other... not a very good job for a health editor but some of the stuff she mentions is ok.

ha ha at too idle for incision! Hey, you can give birth vaginally without ever being examined internally you know. Perfectly possible.

I get fed up with people being negative about C sections. I had one with a breach baby and it was fantastic, staff were great, baby was born healthy! Why people feel they need to apologise that it was C-section amazes me. Some people even suggest that I will be luckier next time & be able to do it properly! I don't think everyone should have one, but they aren't a second best option!

Someone asked for the statistics again, rather than writing it down again I'll just copy my own post from further down.

'Ok, when they prepped me for my scheduled c/s they told me (because I asked lots and lots of questions) that statistically a scheduled c/s is the safest form of delivery for both mother and child. Full stop. The reason why statiscally a c/s is 4% less safe than a vaginal birth is that emergency sections are usually done when something is really wrong. That affects the statistics.

If you compare scheduled (elective) c/s to all vaginal births then it is statistically the safest option. If you compare all c/s (including the emergency ones) to all vaginal births then the vaginal births are statistically the safest option.'

Plus with a scheduled c/s you cut out the greatest risk factor of all - an emergency c/s. With any vaginal delivery that risk is always there.

I agree though, in order to have real statistics controlled studies need to be done, i.e. you divide a large number of women into two random sub-groups and one group gets a routine c/s and one is going in for a vaginal delivery. Then you could compare the results and get a better idea. However, ideally the sub-groups would have to be quite large and the same study should be done in different hospitals. I'm not sure how many women would sign up for it though, ...and then in come the ethical implication ... Ah, statistics are a total minefield.

Jesus. Haven't had chance to read everything but I can't believe what a horribly sensitive subject c-sections are. The media pits woman against woman when in actual fact, every situation is different and neither option should be better or worse, or "right or wrong". I had two c=sections. My first son was breech and weighed 11lb 2oz. In retrospect, I realised it was probably the right decision. If I'd been giving birth 100 years ago, I suppose i might have died. With second, tried for a normal delivery and had fairly normal labour until end bit when a dud epidural and a worried consultant wheeled me in for a c-section. At the end of the day, didn't really matter. It's a few hours in your life (which, I admit in some cases is one of the most dire and emotionally scarring) but it's hardly that important in relation to the rest of yours or your kid's life. Among my friends, nobody feels superior or inferior about the way they gave birth...we're too busy screaming at the kids. Whoever coined the phrase "too posh to push" wants shooting.

The midwife told me to push like hell because she thought I could need a C (suspected cord round baby's neck causing slow recovery every contraction). As she'd had 2 C's she said she wouldn't let any women in her care have one! I pushed like hell and the doc decided after the oxygen test to do an assisted as I was so close. She was right about the cord!

This made me determined to have natural next time and I managed this, even though junior was 9lb 6oz! yes I tore, but to be honest I'd rather that than have a big scar across my midriff and breast feed whilst on 'morphine'!

Planned C-sections enable hospitals to treat births like an assembly line...

I have read articles about damage to pelvic floors and stress incontinence caused by natural births too, howver adn can accept this may be a good reason to suggest C's, but to be frank the mum should have the choice - it's our human right!!

Vaginal births are not always best. My birth experience was terrible. I was denied all pain relief, even though the pain was excruciating. They put my baby in danger as the midwives wouldn't monitor his heartbeat. The forceps and ventouse put my baby in an incubator for 10 days. He then screamed in pain for 3 months. 1 year on my vagina is so damaged I need an operation to have it reconstructed and have to be on a waiting list for 6 months before they can do it. Even then the doctors don't know if it will sort the problem out. Women should have the right to a c/s if they want one.

Sorry havent read it all but I have read Henners post at the beginning of thread and I couldnt agree more!

It is sooo wrong to be negative about c-sections. I strongly dislike it when people look upon having a csection as a second best option or something to feel sorry for.

My first birth was an unexpected c-section, i went overdue by 14 days and then they wanted to induce me, then spent 4 days trying to get me into labour with no success, so ended up as a c-section. I can truely say it is one of the most amazing and surprisingly calm and chilled experiences of my life, we had music playing and nurses and doctors chatted and joked, it was all very relaxed. I always look back at the whole birth being a fantastic experience!

I too had people feeling sorry for me afterwards because it had resulted in c-section. It used to really get on my wick, people thinking it was something to feel sorry for me! I found myself constantly saying, 'NO REALLY' it was the best experience of my life! so much so, that when i was pregnant with my second baby, i was given the choice natural or c section, and i chose to go for another c-section.

On my first c-section, the NHS surgeon, said he would only ever let his wife have a c-section and wouldnt want her to go through a vaginal birth! Not my opinion, but very interesting to hear a NHS surgeon say that. Please dont get me wrong, I believe that whatever way a baby is born into the world it is an incredible miracle and a huge achievement/life changing moment for a women, I def dont think any women should be made to feel second best just by the way their baby enters the world! But unfortunately it is usually us c-section ladys who feel we are made to feel like either we had a second best birth/failed in some way/or copped out in some way....have heard the phrase 'Too posh to Push' from time to time. I'd like to say you certainly dont feel 'posh' when youre laying on an operating table about to be cut open and its taking everything you have to not say 'STOP-I'M NOT READY FOR THIS!' I felt very brave what I went through to get my2 babies, being awake through major surgery! I look back and think it was all incredible

He wouldn't let her have a vaginal birth?

Gawd, he's my worst nightmare! I would be truly upset if my daughter allowed her partner to tell her how she had to give birth.

I don't think so.

I have read a few more posts and I agree; why shouldnt we as women have the choice as to how we give birth. For goodness sake its prob one of the most important things we do as women, and if it ends up being traumatic, it can have all sorts of effects on us, including PNDepression. We should definitely have the choice.

Because I had a csection for my DS1, with my 2nd birth i felt that a vaginal birth would be more of a risk. A risk that it would end in a rushed and scary emergancy csection (cause they're not as likely to let you go on so long in labour because of scar rupturing) and then with a general anesthetic, id then miss completely the birth of my baby. From chatting to other mums it seems that women who have had an emergency c-sections always have a completely different take on the experience (IME negative and traumatic) than the women who elected sections.

With an elected section it was completely calm and I felt in control and part of my own birth experience. Believe me, my original birth plan was all natural and NO drugs, but you cant predict how any natural birth will pan out.

Of all my friends with children, only one had a natural no intervention birth and she ended up with three months recovery for chronic piles, where she was in agony, while I had healed from a scheduled csection in under 6 weeks. The others had some kind of assisted delievery which they would describe as traumatic for them and their baby, and would prefer to forget the experience.I also know a friend who had her first baby at the private hospital the Portland, and her consultant advised her to go for a section as well, makes you wonder if the professionals DO really know something we dont!!

I know it could be strongly contraversial to say this, but sometimes I wonder about medical stuff moving on for a reason, and in the 'good ol days' when we were left to have our babies in the corner of our house, there were lots more women and babies lost in child birth. (re what the nhs surgeon said to me. You know IMO (sorry if really OTT), they used to cut our limbs off without anesthetic in the old days, doesnt mean it was right to put someone through such barbaric pain, and that we should still do it, thats why we've all moved on medically, perhaps a schedule csection is a good thing in some cases, and should be left open to a personal choice. sorry for the rant!

Im with you gooseygosling - you managed to sum it all up in one paragraph to my fifty paragraphs!

I def agree about the 'too posh to push' phrase aswell, my friend even had a midwife say that to her, she felt soo insulted! Can you believe it. Such a derogatry statement!

Sorry i havent read the whole post-too lazy but i just wanted to say that as a woman who has had two vaginal deliveries i would hate the thought of having a c-section just because someone thinks all women should have one. I am one of the most screamish people around and throughout both pregnancies I kept worrying that i would need a c-section, the thought of being awake and feeling them tugging inside my tummy uuurgh! They would have had to knock me out cold.

I know a lot of people have had them but the thought of them terrifies me. Obviously if it is better for the baby's health/mums health then i agree with having c-sections. If this woman in the guardian was important enough for her opinions to be taken notice of and it was compulsary to have a c-section i would never have another child, probably sound stupid but im that terrified of them

Hats off to everyone on here that has had them, you are braver than me regardless of the circumstances.

When DS was born, I planned a vaginal birth - it went very wrong and ended up delivering under emergency c-section - I have no idea what happened as I was out cold. When my twins were born we had planned for probability of C-Section so had epidural at the very beginning, it was a miraculous experience.

Both cs were for medical reasons & frankly I wouldn't recommend cs as routine. It takes longer to recover & taking care of DS whilst I was recovering from the 2nd cs was a nightmare. Not supposed to lift anything heavy for 6 months - how was that supposed to happen when DS was only 21 months old?

A c-section is all well and good when it is needed but I don't think NEEDLESS major surgery is the answer to anything.

just finished night feed of dd 10 days old by c section. I would have liked my second vaginal birth 3 hours no sweat and big heathly baby, but it was not to be. This one went sideways and that was the end of it. I'm very happy with the out come the discomfort is no worse than my first birth 23 hours and a cut which has been a pain since it was done. (To be sorted out.) The doctors seemed to want a natural birth more than me. Once it had gone wrong I was pleased with the option of the c section. It was great loads of pain killers and tlc 40 mins and a baby at the end of it. I have a sore tum rather than bum. Just as tired as I was with the other two but well worth the 9 months and birth which ever way it went. I think choice and information are what we need: the nice and the nasty bits would be useful.

We should probably C Section all Kiwi's (the bird not the fruit). Their eggs are 20% of the size of the female kiwi. Not crossbred - just unlucky.

Still at least no Coldplay.

bobby - what about baby elephants ? they must be a bugger to push out