My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Get updates on how your baby develops, your body changes, and what you can expect during each week of your pregnancy by signing up to the Mumsnet Pregnancy Newsletters.

Childbirth

why the drive to reduce cs rates in nhs trusts?

339 replies

cakebaby · 19/02/2013 08:28

Hello ladies
Long time shadow dweller, after 12 week scan its definitely a real baby and not just cake, so I've ventured into the light.
l'm 39 & have had to delay pregnancy for a number of reasons, one of them being a total horror of all things birth related. I have no idea where this has come from & cannot rationalise it. I hate hospitals & have to visit them fairly regularly for work. I get light headed, sweaty, spots before eyes, the works. I suspect this is related to my mothers slow death in hospital when I was in my teens.

At my booking in appt the MW briefly mentioned the b word & gave some options like hospital, birthing unit, home birth, completely ignoring elcs. My pack from the MW with hospital leaflet also completely ignores elcs but states they are proud to be reducing the cs rate. She laughed off talk of an elcs as if I was bonkers and gave the old line 'women have been giving birth for millions of years.... body designed for it' blah...
This was not a great start for me, in one sentence she has compounded my suspicion I will not be in control of my body and what happens to me when it comes to birth, that I won't be listened to or have any say in things. This is not just about requesting an elcs, but about being treated with respect & being listened to.

So, why are NHS trusts so keen to reduce the number of cs, to the point of seemingly aggressively campaigning against them or at least cheerfully ignoring the possibility of one?
Sorry for long post, this is causing me increasing anxiety already.

OP posts:
Report
MmeThenardier · 04/03/2013 11:45

Bamboozled why gamble at the end?

To answer your question because there is also a risk with induction, just as there is in going over.

So we have to decide which is the greater risk. Here we are routinely offered induction at +14, on the other side of town, the hospital routinely offers induction at +10.

So someone is wrong or has a different take on the data or a different agenda. This is one of the reasons that it is sometimes hard to trust medical professionals - when two are completely contradicting each other. Indeed often there is no 'correct' just an educated opinion based on many factors.

Women are perfectly entitled to expect good explanations and have their questions answered.

I have come across some arrogant, bullying Drs who don't seem to realise that part of their role is to communicate with their patient (the Mother of course). A 'fight' is an interesting use of language.

Report
bamboozled · 04/03/2013 11:47

Just to clarify, I didn't use the word fight over induction, it was over getting peo

Report
RedToothBrush · 04/03/2013 11:49

Why is it the case that inductions are done by the calendar and the policy of the hospital (which vary enormously from hospital to hospital) primarily.

And yet its ELCS - which are now no longer recommended before 39 weeks without clinical need - are vilified as 'fitting around the schedules' of either mothers or consultants.

We know the truth is both are routinely planned around staffing. Particularly since inductions are the default choice over monitoring.

Both have consequences if they are done too early or too late.

I think its relevant because, the value and social acceptability and clear double standards here are about control and what the hospital or doctors or whoever wants AHEAD of the interests of mother and child.

We have to be fitted into nice neat little boxes and behave.

Report
bamboozled · 04/03/2013 11:51

Sorry, fat finger syndrome, it was over getting people's consent for emergency surgery, to save the life of the mother/child/both, because it is not written on the birth plan, when stats are dropping and outcomes are looking very poor. A piece of paper isn't going to change an outcome, but some people stick rigidly to what they have written, even when the facts are right in front of them, heart rate monitors etc... That is what I was referring to..

Report
lotsofcheese · 04/03/2013 12:56

I think another factor to consider on the elcs v's trying for a vb is the availability of senior medical staff outwith 9-5 hours.

I'll be having a CS again this time & with a high risk pregnancy, would rather have an planned elcs performed by a consultant during working hours, with full medical support on site.

I will be declining ecv, induction etc as I do not wish to have an emcs performed by a junior member of staff. Or some inexperienced registrar making the decision should an emergency arise in a natural birth.

I won't go into my obstetric history in this thread, as it's not appropriate, but no amount of cbt, persuasion or discussion will change my history or make a vb any safer for me, physically or emotionally.

OP, I hope you manage to get your elcs. Insist on seeing a consultant (not any grade of staff lower than this) but expect that final decisions in any birth are not made till around 36 weeks.

Report
LaVolcan · 04/03/2013 13:08

it was over getting people's consent for emergency surgery, to save the life of the mother/child/both, because it is not written on the birth plan,.............but some people stick rigidly to what they have written, even when the facts are right in front of them, heart rate monitors etc...

I wonder if we are back to the issue of trust here? If you see a different person at each ante-natal visit and then go through two or three shifts of different staff in labour, none of whom you have met before, who might be contradicting each other, then could it be a question of not knowing who to believe? Then perhaps sticking (too) rigidly to the birth plan is your way of coping?

I don't know, I am just musing.

Report
MmeThenardier · 04/03/2013 13:26

I realise what you meant bamboozle. What I mean is that when the 'rules' vary across the town (and the example here is induction) and two consultants are giving out different information this may apply to other things.

Such as the intepretation of when an emcs becomes an emergency. In which case it is no wonder that women want to clarify that there really is a need for a procedure to be carried out. Whether that is induction or an emcs, forceps, episiotomy etc.

Trust is important too. Its so common to hear about unnecessary intervention. Who wouldn't want to establish they're aren't about to become a victim of this.

And honestly, if he's tearing his hair out over this regularly perhaps he needs to change his approach and start recognising that women expect to be communicated with. A medic (or similar) who regularly writes patients off as 'not compliant' or complains that they don't understand, needs to look at their own skills.

Report
RedToothBrush · 04/03/2013 13:29

La Volcan, I think its possibly more to do with this idea of mentality too. Its so strongly ingrained and presented throughout the process. All the stuff about how to avoid a CS being down to what you do and within your control. People don't want to believe that it isn't the case as it opens them up to this idea of 'failure' which is the opposite of all the positive thinking and determination they've been taught is so essential. Look at responses to threads like these that talk in ridiculous terms in that manner and are completely blinkered to women who have had a bad experience. Its a weird form of denial.

I do also think its down to trust in a huge part too though.

Obviously these feelings have been created by this idea that CS are widely being carried out when they aren't necessary.

Report
MmeThenardier · 04/03/2013 13:35

As to the OP. I'm not sure... Something to do with saving money probably. Although you only have to look at the amount working cost the NHS to realise its probably a false economy.

Personally I'm in favour of supporting women in whatever they want be that Home birth, instant epidural or elective caesarean.

I don't like the suggestion that these things are 'too expensive'. There is always money available in this country for certain things, there's no excuse for poor maternity care.

Also it brings us back to this idea that women ought to feel pain (cos they always have) and shouldn't be given a choice. As has been said before on similar threads, people aren't refused pain relief post surgery why should they be on the labour ward.

Report
bamboozled · 04/03/2013 13:50

His communication skills are great. He spends all day talking to women, terrified women, women in pain and exhausted women. No one wants the consultant in the room in what is meant to be a straightforward delivery. His presence there means that things have changed, the stakes are raised and it is his job to take the fear, absorb as much of the stress as possible, and turn it into a situation with a good outcome. It's just that there are a certain percentage of people who will not listen to advice. It's pretty hard to not tear your hair out when you are trying to save someone's life, have explained in great detail why the procedure is necessary and still people say, but I wrote on my birth plan I didn't want any intervention. In what way is this different to people who drive into rivers because their sat nav told them to turn left, even though they can see the water in front of them..? His aim is to have a reasonable dialogue, but don't ignore medical advice and then blame it on the drs when the outcome is poor.

Report
LaVolcan · 04/03/2013 14:14

He's probably as much a victim of the production line system as everyone else. IMO we need to get back to a human scale as far as health care is concerned.

Report
Chunderella · 04/03/2013 17:48

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

trustissues75 · 05/03/2013 07:40

bamboozled - with regard the age of the placenta there appears to be a relatively quick and easy way to see how it's doing and tis rate of calcification and that's through ultrasound.

I do understand tht your DH must get very frustrated at times but he also needs to realise that if the NHS actually helped to educate women properly instead of giving them what basically boils down to a list at their booking appoint of what they "can and can't do" then there may be more trust and faith. \there are plenty of women out there who are quite happy to go along with whatever the Dr/midwife says and never question anything - I personally think this is a highly dangerous things to do. If you look at various NHS web-pages there are suggestions that the patient should play and active, informed role in their treatment - and yet that doesn't seem to apply to women who are pregnant/in labour unless you are very lucky to come across a hospital and staff who are a bit less mainstream - or that's my experience anyway.

For those women that want to think for themselves, this lack of information, use of words/phrasing that automatically implies there is to be no discussion, and lists of what they can and cant do gives us the impression that we're almost expected not to question...for me, during my first pregnancy, that meant I had almost zero trust

Report
RedToothBrush · 05/03/2013 08:58

When doctors have Godlike status and its proven to be fallible then of course it creates problems. Medicine is pretty much trial and error based on observation. Every patient to a greater or lesser degree is a guinea pig depending on the extent of research that has been done in that particular area. Patients don't respond the same way to virtually anything. They respond in similar ways but not the same. Medicine is still very primitive in a way and we have an expectation that it knows and understands far more than it actually does. Which means that prescribed policies at completely at odds with this reality and it ties the hands of HCPs. Patients could really do with knowing this a little better tbh.

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.