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.

This is interesting. I was talking to a gynacologist last week who is a big fan of c-sections.

When I asked him why, he said "I spend every day talking to crying women who laboured naturally for 30 hours and haven't had sex for 20 years because of it. Someone should have stopped them and said 'Have a section now or you will spend the rest of your life regretting it' but no one did, and no one does."

I've been on our local hospital tour quite a few times and if theatre is free, I have been taken with a group into there as well as the pool room, the midwifery led birth rooms and the consultant led unit. The only place off-limits - and completely underatandably - is special care/NICU. And I've never heard anyone ask to see it. In fact, on most of the tours I've been on, there have been very few questions, if any, from the parents.

what an arse (that gynae)

control freak with a god complex

Oh, yes, b/c the most important thing in the world is sex. [rolls eyes]. Some men!

I laboured for 24 hours. Was awake for 32. Don't regret it at all. Was thanking f*ck I didn't have to have a csection.

Er, it's perfectly possible to give birth vaginally and have a great sex life though! Agree, what an arse.

Just back on computer so forgive me if I am going over olsd ground. Uwila the questions you were asking about numbers on duty and policies should be easily answered by any midwife leading a tour and if not then you should have been offered answers from someone who knew. Cannot understand why that info should have been treated as classified and am feeling a bit closer to understanding your frustration and lack of trust in the nhs. If I thought I had ever denied anyone info or made them feel that the birth wasn't their experience I would seriously consider giving notice.

I'm concerned that we don't know the exact mortality rates for giving birth under a tree. I want to make sure I am armed with this knowledge for next time, in case I fancy that option

Recent research has found that although vaginal delivery affects sexual function in the early months following birth by 10 months to a year their is no statistical difference between vaginal and caesarian births.

Gynae docs only ever deal with the "bad" births and postnatal problems so they have a skewed viewpoint. Also they are by nature medicalised and gravitate that way. Midwives can be as biased but tend to have seen both sides

:) tribot!

So, can we agree yet that both medicalised and natural birth are credible views and it should therefore be weighted heavily on the mother's preference (within medical limitations of course)?

Enid, here's an article about \link{http://www.guardian.co.uk/family/story/0,,1656246,00.html\lovely c-sections} for you .

If the playing field were that level we wouldn't need this discussion

If everyone were bothered to research enough to make a truly informed choice for themselves and their child then parental preference could outweigh all other considerations, but pregnancy and birth are unfortunately not predictable, and are emotive and subjective. Many people rely on poor journalism or hearsay to make their decisions

And why is that waggledancer? I think it's beause my experiences are unfortunately typical. I think the quality of service in the NHs is very hit or miss. So, people get fristrated. And they come to places like mumsnet for medical advice. I see it give out all the time. I even give it out myself sometimes. And I'm not more qualifies than anyone. I am by the way most certainly not having a go at the individuals in the NHS. I just think they are understaffed, over worked, sometimes left to do jobs they aren't really trained to do (like that poor woman who had to give the hospital tour -- she wasn't a midwife). We end up with patient led care. And that to me is a very dangerous thing.

WWW, from what I remember, older mothers are more at risk of complications during pregnancy that could lead to a decision to have CS.
Tibot, have searched high and low but my stats on tree-birthing have just disappeared into thin air.
Shall have to renounce my Queen of Stats title and retire gracefully

Nah, Uwila, I can't go with that I'm afraid. Those stats show that vaginal birth is safer and so I think that should be the norm.

Those stats show a correlation, not a cause and effect. The higher mortality rate could very well be due to whatever causes led to the caesarean, and not the caesarean itself. So, really, the stats would have to look only at women who had an elective caesarean and had absolutely no medical indication of needing one.

So, you see WWW, you are actually arguing that everyone should go your way on childbirth (your way being natural childbirth) and that is exactly as absurd as someone saying that everyone (including you) should have a caesarean.

Uwila - is that not we're talking about here? Elective sections v. non-elective?

But the statistics as far as I know refer to caesareans in genreal, including those with an underlying medical cause.

Also, these statistics, are they workdwide, or UK NHS hospital based? There is room for an awful lot of confounding variables here.

No, I'm not arguing that everyone should have a vaginal birth BUT I am saying that I think it should be the default method of giving birth, yes, I do, especially IF it is safer for mothers and babies which I think it probably is. (someone, what do the stats show then? Do they back me up?) So yes, I suppose I do think it ought to be the norm and that Jo Revill is talking crap when she says she thinks women ought to routinely be offered and have sections without medical reason. I'm not talking about medical conditions that mean a section is necessary, not at all, that's fine, of course it is. Gotta go, back later maybe!

So actually there is no need to recommend caesarians for all but a great need to provide good info to all across the board. I don't understand your advocating maternal preference but not patient led care, surely they are one and the same?

Totally agree - and by saying that we should offer it as a matter of routine is to say that we know all the statistics point to c-sections being less safe for mothers and babies, but hell, we're going to ignore all that.

waggledancer wrote: "Recent research has found that although vaginal delivery affects sexual function in the early months following birth by 10 months to a year their is no statistical difference between vaginal and caesarian births."

That strikes me as absurd. I've had two vaginal births and they've both left me with a lot of unfortunate damage.

Cite your source pls