Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Childbirth

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

Do women feel as if they're being told 'you shouldn't have a section'???

278 replies

tiktok · 27/04/2004 09:57

Various organisations, including NCT, campaign for choice of place of birth and type of birth, and point to the rising caesarean section rate with concern. This is because the high numbers contrast with the likely figure of women and babies who need a section for medical reasons. It also reflects concern that on the whole, recovery after a section can be longer and more difficult. I don't think this is the equivalent of telling individual women they shouldn't have sections (clearly, the op is life saving for some, anyway), but this is how it seems to be interpreted. Comments?

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
LadyMuck · 27/04/2004 10:06

I guess my problem with the various campaigns is that they often don't seem to consider an "elective c-section" as a suitable choice. If you want to opt for a home birth there is a wealth of support available from NCT/AIMS etc. If you want to opt for a c/s then you have to justify that option in a way that a homebirth mum doesn't seem to need to. Campaigners seem to have a blind spot in that a woman can be informed to the risks of the various types of deliveries and opt for a c/section.

The NHS seem to be put under pressure to reduce c/sections, and so I feel that my choice of birth is being limited. Can't seem to find many campaigns to back me though...

tiktok · 27/04/2004 11:00

Why not start one, LadyM, if you feel strongly about it!!

OP posts:
aloha · 27/04/2004 11:12

I do think saying, as Belinda Phipps does, that recovery from a section is "AT LEAST six weeks" is a big fat lie, and she must know it. A quick flick through MN postings would tell her so. It's propaganda, not information. I read the stuff and it is clear IMO that the NCT has some moral issue with c-section that goes beyond a concern for women. After all, they barely mention the risks of having a breech baby vaginally - but they are statistically greater than having an elective c-section for any reason. They also talk a lot about the cost to the NHS of sections, but never discuss other things in cost terms - eg more midwives, birthing pools for everyone, home-style birthing units (all of which I support btw). I have actually been on a TV show with Ms Phipps in which she attacked the whole idea of c-section by choice. She believes there is one best way to give birth - and that's vaginally, without pain relief. And I do think that strongly held opinion permeates the whole organisation and I think that's a great shame.

aloha · 27/04/2004 11:15

And the begrudging acceptance that c-sections save lives is not the same as supporting choice for women, IMO. There is definitely a moral - 'curse of Eve'-type attitude prevailing. And I think portraying women who want sections as ill-informed is simply not true of women I know.

aloha · 27/04/2004 11:15

But the NCT isn't as bad as AIMS, obviously.

LadyMuck · 27/04/2004 11:26

Tiktok, because at this precise moment the issue that I'm most concerned about relating to childbirth is the lack of midwives locally. We're still about 15% short of target, and have only got there by importing loads of midwives from the Far East.

And also because if the NCT are supposedly campaigning for choice of pace and type of birth then logically C/sections should be included in that??

LadyMuck · 27/04/2004 11:27

There is also this wonderful perception in the media that women who elect for sections are "too posh to push". How pro-choice is that?

CountessDracula · 27/04/2004 11:31

I think that the issue is one of personal choice. If you are genuinely terrified of giving birth (as a friend of mine, a doctor incidentally, was) then where is the benefit in forcing them to attempt vaginal delivery?

Whatever you do there will always be some idiotic busybody in the background saying you should have done it differently.

Twinkie · 27/04/2004 11:36

Sorry to sound really stupid here and I have no problems with ceasareans other than not to understand why anyone would want to go through one if they have an option - but to me a c section is not an 'option' when it comes to giving birth - I can give birth in a birthing centre, a hospital or at home, with drugs, without or with only gas and air or pethadine or an epidural but I don't understand how people can call a c section a choice of how to give birth - to me there has to be a medical reason or psychological - am I really stupid or can you just roll up and demand a ceasarean just because???

lazyeye · 27/04/2004 11:37

Agree with Aloha that the 6 wk recovery thing is a bit of propaganda. Know lots of women who have had sections and they have been up and about in a couple of weeks as normal. They should tell the truth at least. I think some sections can be easier to recover from that vagainal to be honest. After ds1 I was in bits for weeks with episiotomy and dire constipation caused by blood loss in vaginal delviery........

CountessDracula · 27/04/2004 11:39

I think it depends on the individual hospital Twinkie, but I think that you can demand one now in a lot of places.

I agree, personally I would have chosen to give birth naturally (as my week-long failed induction may imply!) but sadly it was not to be. How do you define a psychological reason though? If you are scared enough of vaginal birth to want to submit to unnecessary surgery then maybe that is sufficient reason - what do you think?

aloha · 27/04/2004 11:41

But Twinkie, why on earth shouldn't there be the option of caesarian section?

piglit · 27/04/2004 11:42

There was another article in the Sunday Times about mums who are "too posh too push". It was really slating women who have an elective c/section. I'll see if I can find it.

aloha · 27/04/2004 11:42

And yes, I do think women should have the option to have one 'just because'.

aloha · 27/04/2004 11:44

And if I'm entirely frank and honest, I really cannot fully understand why anyone would opt for what I genuinely consider to be the horrors of labour and vaginal birth over a quick, painless, dignified c-section. I do realise some people don't want a c-section though and I respect that choice.

piglit · 27/04/2004 11:47

Sorry - I can't get the hang of the link thing.

Doctors told to curb 'posh' caesareans
Lois Rogers, Medical Editor

NHS DOCTORS will this week be told to curb caesareans on demand for women who wish to avoid natural childbirth.
The government’s clinical advisers are alarmed by the number of women who are asking NHS doctors to give them caesareans merely because they are convenient.

It follows a number of high-profile “too posh to push” cases in which celebrities have opted for the operation when there were no pressing medical reasons to do so.

The instructions to halt the practice will be contained in new guidelines from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (Nice) to be published on Wednesday.

The advice will say caesareans on demand should no longer be an option because “maternal request is not on its own an indication for caesarean section”.

Women who want planned births to fit in with work or social commitments will be told they will have to pay up to £10,000 for a private delivery.

The Nice document tells doctors that they should interrogate pregnant women about exactly why they want a caesarean, and emphasise the potential dangers. Expectant mothers who complain they will be traumatised by the pain of a natural birth should be offered “counselling or psychotherapy,” the document says.

Doctors will also be expected to write a full account of how they talked her out of a caesarean in the woman’s notes. The risks include post-operative infection, haemorrhage and possible greater difficulty in conceiving subsequent children.

Up to one in three women have caesarean births in some parts of Britain — twice the 15% maximum recommended by World Health Organisation childbirth guidelines.

At least 10,000 such births on the NHS are recorded as taking place for no other reason than maternal choice — at a cost of £25m to the health service.

However, government obstetric advisers believe many more of the annual total of 150,000 surgical deliveries are recorded by doctors in patients’ notes as being medically necessary, purely to avoid questions being asked about the extra cost.

A natural hospital delivery costs only £700, and many women go home within hours of birth. However, a caesarean costs the NHS £1,700 because it involves a longer stay and expensive surgery.

“When a woman requests a CS (caesarean section) in the absence of an identifiable reason, there should be a record of the overall benefits and risks of CS compared with vaginal birth, discussed with the woman,” the document says.

It is thought the guidelines are unlikely to fuel a big switch to private births because most health insurance does not cover the substantial cost.

However, many wealthy mothers are prepared to pay up front for caesareans, and the “too posh to push” maxim has almost become a fashion statement in the private sector. Top maternity hospitals such as the Portland in London, perform caesareans on half the 1,800 women who give birth there annually.

Many celebrities openly admit they have planned childbirth to fit in with their lives. Elizabeth Hurley, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Zoë Ball all had pre-planned caesareans.

Victoria Beckham had one for the birth of her son Romeo to fit around the football commitments of her England captain husband, David.

Earlier this month Jo Williams, wife of the world snooker champion Mark, organised a caesarean birth for their son Connor ahead of her husband’s defence of his title, in order not to distract him. However, the strategy did not work: he was knocked out of the tournament in Sheffield yesterday.

This weekend pop star Sophie Ellis Bextor became the latest recruit to the ranks of celebrity caesarean mothers, but in her case it was to avert a life-threatening emergency caused by the blood pressure condition pre-eclampsia. Her baby boy Sonny was delivered on Friday, eight weeks early, and mother and baby are both healthy and now doing well.

Privately, obstetricians fear the Nice guidelines may be ignored by some NHS doctors.

“If you say there was a clinical need for an operative delivery, they can’t argue,” said one. “Lots of women don’t want to risk incontinence and damage to their sex lives by having a natural birth.”

Ironically the guidelines are being published just days after the department of health admitted it cannot offer home births in many areas because of a chronic shortage of midwives competent enough to work away from the panoply of hospital monitors and equipment.

Last week Abbie Gregg, 21, a low-risk pregnant mother from the Pennine village of Heptonstall, West Yorkshire, was told she would have to get the bus into hospital when she goes into labour.

Linda Green, from nearby Todmorden, was given a similar story. “I am furious,” she said. “I have never used the NHS for anything and when I need it now, the service isn’t there.”

LadyMuck · 27/04/2004 11:47

Twinkee, not sure that the option is really there at the moment. My local hospital is really worried about how its c/section rates are being seen against the current media trend that c/sections rates are indicative of the "success" of a hospital etc. Also no local NHS option of midwife led unit etc. Only options here are homebirth or hospital. Still a postcode lottery!

Twinkie · 27/04/2004 11:51

In my mind it is not an option - you give birth vaginally and only by c section if there is a problem be it physical or mental and even then I would be scared half to death.

I am trying to say that to me giving birth is just that giving birth - a cesarean (and I am not taking away the miracle of birth that women who have had c sections have been through or saying that their birth is not a valid) - is not giving birth it is a surgical procedure that is not natural.

I know I am going to get lambasted here but I cannot for the life of me see for any other reason why someone would want to put their self through a c section over natural birth - of course unless their is a risk to them or their child.

Twinkie · 27/04/2004 11:53

NHS DOCTORS will this week be told to curb caesareans on demand for women who wish to avoid NATURAL childbirth.

dottee · 27/04/2004 11:53

I agree CD, through personal experience.

My 1st child, my dd, was a vaginal delivery and although I'd done my birth-plan, been to a/n classes and practiced keeping calm etc., events didn't go as planned and labour came on fast and furious. In fact nothing went to plan at all. Unfortunately, my dd has CP.

When I fell pregnant with ds (after miscarrying in between the children), I insisted on an elective c-section but got the response ' we'll talk about it later'. I stuck to my guns and my consultant agreed to it the week before ds was due. When I arrived at hospital, I was met with the remark, 'why are you having a section when you've had a natural birth' from a bullying midwife. She soon shut up when I mentioned 'Cerebral Palsy'.

There was a good chance ds would have been fine being delivered through vaginal delivery but I wanted the reassurance that delivery would be to plan via section. I was well aware of the dangers to myself and ds, and had considered this before asking for a section. I had a great community midwife, for both live births, who was not afraid to say things off the record. She warned me that I may face opposition to 'demanding' a section because of the costs. Ds is 10 this coming weekend and she told me that section deliveries cost £1000 more because of the manpower involved in theatre.

aloha · 27/04/2004 11:54

You'd be scared, Twinkie, but I wouldn't. And I think I explained why I think a c-section is preferable. So why SHOULDN'T I have my choice of birth?

aloha · 27/04/2004 11:57

Twinkie, pain relief isn't 'natural' - antibiotics aren't 'natural' - I don't think the 'you can't have it if it's not natural' argument is a very strong one.
The costs argument is often wheeled out by the anti-c-section brigade, but it really isn't that simple. Most of the costs involved are in providing the operating theatres and the costs of having doctors there - which you would obviously need anyway. Many consultants do not believe it would save the NHS money to cut the section rate. Anyway if money is all that counts, then we can wave bye-bye to more midwives and birthing pools and new birth centres too.

dottee · 27/04/2004 12:02

And totally empathise with Lazyeye. My episiostomy scar still hurts sometimes during sex ten years later (after dd) and not a single problem with section scar (have trouble finding it sometimes).

dottee · 27/04/2004 12:02

Sorry - epi scar 12 years old - section 10 years old.

Codswallop · 27/04/2004 12:19

Twinkie I dont see why anyone would choose for covnenience reasons to have a scar and all that pain. Yuk

catheter, no driving

.. alos friends of mine seem to find it very hard to loose their tum