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.

No expat, you're wrong.

Wrong I say!

hides the condoms and the leafelt about vesectomies

That should be leaflet and vasectomies... but nevermind!

Well, I am completely at ease with this. If a woman chooses to have a caesarean whilst in full possession of the facts and with the appropriate support and counselling offered, then so be it so it. I don’t like the idea of a particular way of giving birth being pushed on any woman just because it society has certain expectations of how women should behave. I also think that medicalisation of childbirth has saved countless lives and we only need look at that mortality rates in third world countries to realise its success. Of course many women are traumatised by the amount of medical intervention that occurs. I was pretty traumatised by mine tbh, but this is preferable to death of the mother or baby. (100 years ago that could have been me)

Oh gawd, this old chestnut again. Far better imo to put the money they'd (theoretically) spend on all those C-sections into providing enough midwives, with decent working conditions, and obligatory courses at charm school. Rather than "Well, let's just chop 'em up, even if they don't need it...it's only women, what the hell do they know?"

Hear, hear, cori.

I would like to know if the majority of women asking for c-sections are those who have previously have attempted VBAC and either had a traumatic birth experience or an emergency c-section. I personally don't know anyone who wants to go for a c-section first time.

Elective caesarians could actually be cheaper for the nhs in the long run, scheduling births for monday to friday 9-5, using drugs bought more cheaply cos lots of them used, replace expensive midwives with cheaper health care assistants, no need for antenatal classes detailing maybes for birth options.

Pregnancy and birth are emotive as this and other threads prove, this article just presses buttons to obtain response imo

lets stop worrying about how we give birth - it doesn't really matter as long as everyone is happy and healthy, problems start when they are not. I wanted a natural delivery ended up with emegency c-section and a 3 litre post partum bleed (nothing to do with surgery just a very long labour). But somewhere the NCT brigade have got to me and sometimes I still feel i failed. It is all getting a bit like breastfeeding damned if you can't and I just hate the mentality.

"NCT brigade have got to me and sometimes I still feel i failed."

I'm sorry you feel you've failed (you haven't), but having been in an NCT antenatal class with women planning C-sections I have to assure you that the NCT is not about telling women HOW to have babies, more promoting a woman's rights in childbirth. This article is appaling because it says ALL women should have C-Sections because they are better!

FairyMum- I remember three women in my NHS antenatal class telling a woman expecting twins who had been booked in for an elective C-section that they were jealous of her because vaginal birth was gross. Seriously.

no, sorry, don't agree with the 'all choices are created equal' argument.

c-sections should happen because they need to (and i include trauma of first birth psychologically as a good reason). otherwise they shouldn't happen. full stop.

Did the midwife really say something along the lines that some births ie vaginal ones were better/a more joyful experience than others? . silly cow (but typical in my experience).Midwives at my hospital certainly talked a lot about how important natural birth was (guilt, guilt). Never occured to me to question them until luckily my gp, consultant and anaethetist (sp?) (all women with children) pointed out the pros and cons and gave a balanced view. Reminds me of the simultaneous haranges we had from midwives on breastfeeding. No one ever even mentioned mastitis. Thought this article covered some familiar ground from the midwife experiences I have had. Luckily, no longer at that hospital for future.

Sophable, I doubt whether you would say that I 'need' to have a ceaseran. However I feel empowered and a bit more in control because I have a consultant that supports my choice.

sorry cori what is your choice?

I had a C-section as my DD was breech and I was advised by every medical person I spoke to that I should have a C-section as my body had not experienced a birth before and they could not tell me that I wouldn't need an emergency section if I tried for a natural birth. I also had pre-eclampsia (albiet it mild) so felt at the end of the day to cut my losses (and my stomach) and have the section. I was in hospital for four nights, and although I recovered very quickly from my section, I wont say it was a walk in the park.
Obviously I cannot compare it to a natural birth as I have not yet had one. I hope to have a natural birth when I have another. I was told by all consultants and health visitors etc that there is no medical reason for me not to have a natural birth next time, so I wont be asking for a section. If a medical reason neccisitates a section, I will have one as it's only usually recommended if the outcome of the surgery is going to be better than a natural delivery.
Haven't read all the article but it does strike me as odd

Suggesting that everyone have a caesarean is no more and no less inappropriate than suggesting everyone should have a natural birth.

With my first child the thought of a caesrean never even occurred to me until I ended up in a crash section under GA at 3am a day and a half after being induced at two weeks over due. Natural birth had been encouraged by the midwifes. The risks were not explained to me. This crash caesarean could have been foreseen, but it wasn't in their procedures to tell me about it.

The result is that I will never again trust the NHS to apprpriately manage the process of vaginal childbirth.

Every woman in every pregnancy should have the right to an elective caesarean if she wants one.

not another c section thread?

uwila, I am with you about the conspiracy of silence around the high risk of crash cs for a (in my case, first time) induction. I felt railroaded by the obstetrician into an induction at 40 weeks (issues with dd) and wanted reassurance that I could still have a natural epidural-free birth (haha, how naive was I). The midwife reassured me about not necessarily requiring an epi (although she did say about the higher incidence of epi in inductions) but said NOTHING about emergency c-sections!!! I ended up with one under GA due to baby going into distress. And that totally broke my confidence. Then the hospital leaves you to cope with the emotional fallout on your own - after all, how could I complain if I safely delivered a baby?? This is one time where I believe every woman who is advised to have an induction should be told the risks and offered the option of a c-section, instead of being shunted into a trial of labour.

Oh this article really irritated me too. I read it and thought 'can I be bothered to write a stinging letter to the Observer which almost certainly won't be printed?' and decided I couldn't. To suggest it's all about cost is ridiculous, frankly. As if midwives are encouraging women to have vaginal births because it's cheaper, does anyone really believe that? Really? But I guess Jo Revil thought if she could get readers outraged that birth options were supposedly based on cost then she'd get a reaction and big postbag = good. I haven't read the thread, sorry if I'm repeating anyone. Will do now.

Coming at this from a totally different perspective, I found it refreshing that the article at least gets people talking about the possibility of birth trauma from a bad vaginal birth/emergency c-section. I thought it was excellent that the author included Maureen Treadwell in the article. Her website has been such a tremendous help to me and so many others.

While it is going to the extreme to suggest that c-sections are better than vaginal births, I thought the point of the article really was to highlight the fact that the NHS promotes vaginal birth over c-sections due to cost vs. sound medical judgment. Living in the US I have had no experience with the NHS, but in reading posts on MN for over a year, this has seemed quite apparent to me.

The article didn't annoy me at all. It was fairly billed as an opinion piece and she used the facts to bolster her opinion, that's what you do with an opinion piece.
I had to have an elective both times and it was quite pleasant to read something that didn't make me feel guilty.
It's all about giving women the birth they need or want, making sure they have the best advice to make the best decision for them. Emotive arguments just make them feel crap and can affect their bond with the new baby.
There's alot of nonsense peddled routinely about 6 week recovery times and difficulty of breast feeding too.

Everyone I know who's had a c-section (all for medical reasons) has managed to breast feed successfully, all were up and about really quickly, none of them experienced fertility problems. It's just not helpful to generalise on that side of the argument either as it make people feel awful for having to have the the c-section in the first place.
Why can't we support women in what happened to them? I hestitate to use the word choice as 'We better give you a c-section or you and the baby won't get of this in one piece without one' is not a choice.

what a load of crap

why on earth are people so frightened of a vaginal delivery?

Where's the evidence for the NHS encouraging vaginal over cs because of cost? Is there any? I'd really like to know.

"I thought the point of the article really was to highlight the fact that the NHS promotes vaginal birth over c-sections due to cost vs. sound medical judgment."

has the world gone completely mad?

Cuz it hurts, Enid!

Well, it did in my case . . .