Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Childbirth

Share experiences and get support around labour, birth and recovery.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Episiotomy vs tearing naturally

41 replies

Dogsmom · 19/02/2013 15:21

I was discussing with my MW about what needs to go on my birth plan and she said to put whether I prefer to be cut rather than tear naturally.

I can't think of any reason why I would prefer to tear but am i missing something? I imagine a tear would be more jagged and potentially go in any direction whereas a planned cut would be neater and therefore easier to stitch and quicker to heal?

OP posts:

NotAnotherPackedLunch · 19/02/2013 15:25

I've had both and the episiotomy healed better and didn't feel odd for as long as the tear.
If I was doing it again I'd ask for an episiotomy.

PoppyWearer · 19/02/2013 15:40

Episiotomies are supposedly more difficult to heal and more likely to reopen at the next birth. I think.

I did quite a bit of reading before my DC1 was born and was adamantly anti-episiotomy in my birth plan. My mistake was probably reading Naomi Wolf's anti-episiotomy rants in "Conception"!

Well, birth plan, ha! DC1 wasn't coming out of me without an episiotomy, so that was what had to happen. In the end. Listening to the midwives talk about how blunt the scissors were was not a high-point of my life, I must say.

With DC2 I didn't have the option as he was coming out so fast. The crowning and tearing hurt a hell of a lot. The midwife also thought I wasn't going to tear much, but had reckoned without his mahoosive nose.

On reflection, I wouldn't be anti-episiotomy again. I'm fact second time around I would have chosen the episiotomy again. But I wouldn't say that I suffer any long-term effects from an episiotomy the first time.

NotAQueef · 19/02/2013 15:46

I don't know really.
I just wanted to confuse things further by adding that I had both an episiotomy and an extended tear at the same blimmin' time!

mamapants · 20/02/2013 20:23

I read that tears are preferable for healing.
I had an episiotomy which I really didn't want before hand couldn't care less at the time, healed fine and neat.

Jsa1980 · 20/02/2013 20:28

Spoke to my midwife about this today, she said when she personally gave birth she asked to tear naturally. I'm still undecided.

Flisspaps · 20/02/2013 20:30

I had an episiotomy which extended into a 3a tear (big!) with DD, and an episiotomy without tearing with DS.

The one that tore extensively was far, far less painful during healing.

amyjayde · 20/02/2013 22:15

I chose to tear naturally and the recovery was fantastic, I had a couple of stitches but to be honest I was not in any pain even the few hours after giving birth, I do not regret my decision

Tranquilitybaby · 20/02/2013 23:34

Tearing is generally better than being cut. Imagine trying to rip a piece of material then again but cutting it with scissors slightly first, the latter would tear easier and more extensively.

readyforno2 · 20/02/2013 23:37

I had an episiotomy with ds1 and tore with ds2.
The tear healed a lot quicker than the cut, my midwife likened it to a bit of torn paper with all the fibres coming together.

SirBoobAlot · 20/02/2013 23:42

Tears heal better in the long run than cuts. If it's a straight cut, there aren't any edges to help the body pull it back together, if that makes sense. I'd much prefer to tear, given the choice, though I was bloody terrified of it during birth.

scarlettsmummy2 · 20/02/2013 23:43

I had second degree natural tears with both babies- no issues with either, second one in particular healed very well. I has a continuous stitch with that one and I think it was much better.

MyGlassIsJustHalfWet · 20/02/2013 23:57

Just wanted to say I tore and although I felt it tearing at the time it was more of a sensation than pain iykwim?
I was adamant I did not want cutting but if I had needed it at the time I would have.
Obviously have nothing to compare but my tear healed super fast.

MammaCici · 21/02/2013 11:36

It's a horrible choice but I chose to tear naturally with DC1. I had 3 small tears each needing one stitch. I'm 30 weeks along with DC2 and tearing v episiotomy is one of those decisions I dread. I guess I'll go with tearing again.

shushpenfold · 21/02/2013 11:38

Have had both...neither was preferable!!! It it was a choice of small tear, I would tear, but having done a second degree tear too (muscle tear plus skin - sorry!) I would rather have had pain relief....

Leave it off the birth plan....you won't care when it gets there!

CSLewis · 21/02/2013 11:43

My understanding is that an episiotomy is easier to stitch (and I think they always require stitches), so some medical professionals push for those, as it makes their lives easier.

A tear is more difficult to stitch, but usually heals better and quicker than an episiotomy, and you don't always have to have stitches, either. My sister had a second-degree tear (1st degree being the least serious), and her midwives were happy for her to decline stitches.

fanoftheinvisibleman · 21/02/2013 11:45

I was adamant I didn't want to be cut. But after pushing for 2 and 1/4 hours following a 23 hour labour I agreed. He has out in a couple of pushes and I wished I'd agreed sooner.

It did take a good year for me to stop being aware of it. A friend had to have surgery to repair a tear then a C section with next due to risk of further tearing. I would personally go with the flow on the day depending on how things progress.

FirstTimeForEverything · 21/02/2013 11:55

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Radiator1234 · 21/02/2013 11:57

Probably not a helpful comment but there is every chance you just won't care on the day.... I hadn't really given much thought to episiotomy v tearing before DD was born, but after 2 hours of pushing, and complete exhaustion, all I kept saying to the midwives was "please cut me.... Please just pull her out". They didn't and eventually I did push her out and had a 2nd degree tear. It was v sore after but healed reasonably quickly. One thing I would say though is whether its an episiotomy/ tear/ whatever, do make sure you change your towel often as my stitches got infected (and I thought I changed the towel often enough) which was pretty grim about 4 days into having a newborn baby and involved having to go back to the hospital/antibiotics etc. good luck!

FirstTimeForEverything · 21/02/2013 12:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Cheddars · 21/02/2013 12:00

runs screaming from the thread

Shagmundfreud · 21/02/2013 12:52

Women who have an episiotomy are more likely to report that intercourse is painful 6 months after the birth. I think it does more nerve damage than a tear. Most midwives I know are massively anti-episiotomy except in extreme cases.

AmberLeaf · 21/02/2013 13:54

I stated no episiotomy on my birth plan.

episiotomy is easier for the person stitching it back up than a natural tear.

Lucky for me I got away with minor grazes.

shushpenfold · 21/02/2013 18:05

LOL at Cheddars!!! Running with stitches stings a bit though

whattodoo · 21/02/2013 18:10

I tore and can honestly say that I didn't know anything about it until the MW started to stitch. I don't know how I didn't feel it (only had gas & air) but it must have just got lost in the whole contractions business.

Healed quickly and with no major problems, other than when we have sex at an unexpected angle.

Kafri · 21/02/2013 20:02

oh rhe memories!

I tore - badly. that was a lot of stitches.

I only had gas and air and can honestly say the birth was easy in comparison to the stitches. I didn't particularly feel the tear but I certainly felt the midwife putting me
back together

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread