MSN article on research showing that 3x more babies die with elective C-sections.

[dizietsma]

Link to the article.

Gosh, I had no idea it was THAT high! How are we all feeling about elective C-sections now?

I don't see a problem with an elective section at all provided the mother is fully aware of all the risks involved.

Informed choice, that's what matters.

Not read the article but don't forget that elective c-sections are often not done just because the Mum fancies it and wanted to keep her undercarriage in tiptop condition. Elective c-scections are often decided on because the pregnancy is already considered a 'risk'.

link to discussion .. assume similar article

With research like this, I think C-sections for reasons like "failure to progress" might become less common.

Yes NomDePlume, good point, I had placenta praevia with dd2 and could not have had a safe vaginal delivery. Although the section wasn't an emergency, I still felt a bit aggrieved to see it in my notes described as 'elective'. I know it's just semantics, but I felt like I was being grouped in with 'too posh to push' sections.

Risk factors like placenta previa were excluded from the study, only healthy normal pregnancies and babies were included. Here's a quote-

"the researchers looked at data from more than 5.8 million births to U.S. women between 1998 and 2001. All of the women were at "no indicated risk" for a C-section, meaning the infant was a singleton, full-term, in a head-down position, and no other medical risk factors or delivery complications were indicated on the child's birth certificate."

Yes, I know, but my section was still referred to as 'elective'. As I said, semantics, but maybe a different term is needed to describe planned, 'clinical reason' sections.

Your section would still have been excluded from the study.

I can understand how it would rankle that your section was referred to as elective, though.

yes it needs to be called ...... a "necessary section" or something like that.

All pre-planned sections are called elective and always have been. Most are performed because vaginal birth is not a safe alternative for the mother or baby. It's a tiny minority that are performed simply because of maternal choice not to labour, but unfortunately they're the ones which attract all the publicity.
This study confirms that for some babies, especially if electively delivered before 39 weeks caesarians can be more risky.

Yes, I know that Waggledancer, I'm suggesting maybe a line needs to be drawn, as even though potentially we both could have died if I had attempted normal delivery, I still have people asking why I 'elected' to have a section!!

But that's their problem of misconception not yours. It drives me mad that childbirth has been turned in to a competitive arena. The only important thing is that you know what your section was for, and as i said it's only a tiny minority of sections which are performed for maternal choice. There is an argument that people who insist on section without medical reason may need it for psychological reasons which may be just as valid.

I don't know about "tiny minority". 5.8 million maternal choice c-section births is like the entire population of Scotland being born by unnecessary C-section, to give you a sense of the scale involved.

those are US figures though, and the rates are nowhere near as high in the UK.
personally I prefer the term "planned section"

I know what you mean, anniediv...over years of infertility, miscarriage and finally a successful pregnancy I have come across a ton of medical terminology that I'd love to change. Hostile mucous, incompetent cervix, advanced maternal age, irritable uterus....
And I'm likely to need an 'elective' this pregnancy, which I'd much rather not elect to have.
Ironically, having argued endlessly with my not very supportive OB, I ended up needing a section with dd and as I'd started the induction process (high bp at 39+ weeks) it got called an emergency. Didn't feel remotely urgent, though necessary.

Like 'planned section' HCC...

I think 5.8 million refers to the total number of live births included in the study, not the number of maternally requested sections. Must admit though that not having seen the full study i can't be sure. I hope the millions figure doesn't reflect non medically indicated surgery!