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

[tiktok]

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?

I can imagine BK, at least the first time I didn't know what was coming. For the second birth when she rubbed the ice-cube up by legs and I knew it hadn't taken completely I had this awful flash back to the first time!

What are you planning for this time around?

Wouldn't it make a lot more sense all round for governments and pressure groups alike to concentrate on reducing the caesarian rate amoung women who don't want them and leaving us who do want them alone? Or is there a problem in that reducing the caesarian rate in women who emphatically don't want them might involve actually spending money - on more midwives for a start?

Soapbox,
Agree with the management of the issue - just noting that there are a huge number of possible outcomes with a natural birth - everything from 2 hour "walk in the park" ideal scenarios, through to permanent disability/fatality. Csections also have a range of outcomes. Do we look at the range of outcomes, the frequency of outcomes - at what point does a birth choice (be it homebirth or c/section) become too unsafe to fund?

Andif we are just looking at safety then elective c/sections in the UK is not an "unsafe" option. So on the basis of safety alone I'm not sure that you could rule it out. It is also becoming increasingly safer. Painfree - well c-sections can be as a pain-free as normal delivery. You can opt not to take the painkillers of course...

So its back to cost - do we really want to limit birth options on this? If the cost of a forceps delivery was higher than a c/section should mothers be forced to have a c/section? Should homebirths requiring more than one midwife shift be automatically transferred to hospital?

Will be back later to discuss more - in the meantime I have to deal with my 2 ds's, neither or whom I "conceived" or "gave birth" to.... but I still got stretchmarks

BK, I am sorry if it did sound as if I was challenging your experience. I do know what an awful time you had. I have a photographic recall of bad births, I'm afraid! And from Mumsnet I do also realise that there are women who even have sections without proper anaesthesia, which is unforgiveable.

And I have to admit LadyMuck, I did permit myself a smile at LadyMuck being too posh too push (or not, of course!)

One last thing - even though I think birth sounds nasty, brutish and far too long, even I can see the advantage in being in your own bed afterwards.

Ok... I want a breast reduction, they (the breasts... make my life hell... back pain which costs me a fortune in osteopaths...
Should I be able to toddle in and ask for one from my local hospital because it suits me..?
If I would prefer a medical procedure for a non medical reason then I would expect to pay for it myself...
And I fully intend to... The NHS is at breaking point without elective non medically essential procedures.
As the mother of a child (and a higher rate tax payer) with a complex genetic condition, I resent ill spent NHS money!
To this end I have paid out time and time again for private treatment because I can.
I actually hate myself for saying the above, I am NOT anti section, I am just anti anyone purporting them to be the best option!

and aloha

I got champers and bacon sandwich at home afterwards
mmmmmmmmmm

No hard feelings, great discussion

Breast reductions are sometimes done on the NHS for the exact reasons that you give. They are also done if there are compelling psychological reasons. The same is also true for other forms of plastic surgery.

And sometimes sections are not only the best option but also the only one, if you want both mother and babe alive and well at the end. Each case has to be taken on its merits.

And I had champers and stilton in bed the day after my section (emergency at 2.00am)

I am pro-choice in birth as in most things, so I would let anyone have a c-section for any reason, including a whim. I would however strive for information to be freely available so that women can make well-informed choices.

Whether an elective c-section should be available on the NHS is another issue open for debate although I personally would be happy for this to be an option on the NHS.

I think that some women who were lucky enough to have had a good birth experience with managable pain find it easy to say that all women should grit their teeth and get on with a vaginal delivery. To which I would say that all women were not created equal in the giving birth stakes - some of us have much more trouble than others, and this should not be dismissed lightly.

As I have stated, I am not against c sections, they are of course an essential part of bringing babies home alive during a sometimesdangerous birth process, my only resevervation is that they are too easily obtained without proper counsel...
If it was the best for my baby and me then I would have a c section without hesitation.
I just wonder about the advisability about having a c section on a non medical basis
and re the breast reduction, its currently a 4 yr wait list where I am and I do not qualify as I am not mentally bothered enough... Try and apply that criteria to the c section
LOL

hmb, I don't think anyone is arguaing against c-sections where there are sound medical/phychological reasons for one. It's the ones where it's for the convenience of it that I think people object to (maybe object isn't the right word. I'm sure you know what I mean!)

can oyu really get these ont he nhs though or is this all urban myth?

If they pay for the convenience thats fine!

Go on then gals.......try and talk me out of it

I'm an old (35) first time perggers woman and my birth choice is a CS. In researching MY birth CHOICE, I've been extrememly lucky that I found this web site very early in my pregnancy, backed up my friend's stories. As with everyone on this site, the stories were pretty much a mixed bag of vaginal/CS with good/bad experiences for both.
I guess I'm also lucky that, in my career as a scientist, I'm used to researching evidence for experiments and making choices. With this, I know there is the uncertainty and risk that no matter how well prepared and informed I am, things may not go to plan.

What I appreciate most about this site is not only the information available, but also the support if you're worried or are having a bad experience. Some days, I feel like I've got hundreds of friends to chat to

I'm bright enough to make my childbirth choice for me. It's not everyone's choice, but it's mine and it's an informed choice. I don't know why, but I feel deeply offended and insulted that someone comes on here and slags off my choice as 'unatural' or even 'dangerous'.

I thought this site was about support, lively discussion and information, not bitching and slagging.

thanks, aloha but it is really my own fault, i've got the worst case of pregnancy brain ever, find i'm not reading things right quite often. despite miserable birth experience before, it was actually pregnancy i was dreading second time around. i really hate it.

I know that no policy should be based on one example, but a dear friend of mine opted for a homebirth for her 2nd child. She did have a bit of a fight on her hands as she had had post-partum bleeding with dd1. But she found enough support amongst midwives etc, and was allowed to plan for a homebirth. Due to her location, they had to make arrangements in the event of needing to be transferred to hospital: helicopter was the only feasible option.

The only reason that my friend opted for a home birth was because she had no-one to look after dd1. Due to her location the 2 midwives would have both had to arrive together, so 1 would have been free to look after dd1.

I dont know how I would have got through my first birth without an epidural. I would not have had a second child had it not been for epidurals, as it was I waited 8 years after having ds to have another. For me it wasnt a case of just forgetting about it once it was over. The birth experience makes me not want anymore and surely that is not a reason not to have more children. If I wasnt allowed an epidural then I would only have had dd if I knew I could have had a csection. Not becuase of any indignity but the pain.

I'd be interested to know how many elective sections are for convience alone. Not being snide, I am realy interested. My second c-section would have been through choice id ds hadn't not made it a medical necessity by being very large and a footling breach. I also had eclampsia so in the end the 'choice' was a medical one. But it was my second section, would that have been seen as a section for 'convenience' if I didn't have the medical reasons? At the time of surgery the surgion commented that I had made the right choice, as my first scar was very thin and could have ruptured very easily.

My sections were not through choice, i have displaced pelvic bones and everytime someone said 'i was too posh to push' i had to explain why as i was made to feel like i was taking the easy option.

I guess the issue for me is whether women are to be allowed to make an informed choice in childbirth or whether there is another agenda. To what extent should cost be the main factor? If we're looking at the constraints on the NHS, then the shortage of midwives is the single biggest issue. This is why homebirths are not as readily available as women would like: 2 midwives cannot be spared for one woman whilst hospital units can have 3 women looked after by one midwife. Should we go back to managed birth (accelerating labour after 12 hours etc) just because it would cost less?

I doubt that that would be the case, and so I suspect that cost or NHS constraints aren't the real reason why there is an apparent prejudice against elective c/sections.

Coddy - don't know about whole of UK but local hospital definitely against. Women are expected to go for VBAC even with 25-30% going on to need emergency c/sections.

That is very interesting Ladymuck, about 'having' to go for a vbac. I was given a very clear choice for my second section. I was offered a trial of labout, and I declined. In the end events dictated that I would have to have a secrtion anyway, but I was never made to feel that I 'should' have tried for a vbac. I had no idea that hospitals differed in their policies that much.

btw my q was genuine

Our hospital has had a highish c/section rate (ealy 20s). I do have a consultant who is anti-intervention (eg lets women go to 43 weeks without induction), but he also ends up with a large number of high-risk cases, so is concerned with the stats (one of the joys of being seen in a teaching hospital is that the consultant explains everything to the students).

Coddy it was a serious answer to your question. Some hospitals will let you "elect" for a c/section if you've had a previous section, but it is not automatic. I know some people who have managed to elect for c/sections after particularly traumatic vaginal births - not sure whether those get classed as "medically necessary"...