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 had morphine for a short while, but I have to say it didn't make me feel drugged or 'out of it' in any way. After that just ordinary painkillers. I'd never deny it was sore for a few days, and tricky to sit up (private bed had electric raise which I was glad of), but perfectly manageable and I picked up ds myself from day one.

NICEguideline

informationforwomennNICE

It's clear from this debate that some caesarians are necessary ? for medical (including psychological) reasons or because there is a well-informed maternal choice. It's tragic that some unecessary caesarians are performed because women aren't well supported in labour and are the victims of botched inductions or misinformation, for instance.
It is equally tragic that some necessary caesarians aren't performed and women are sometimes brutalised by appalling instrumental deliveries (I mean the sort of stories posted here, not that all instrumental deliveries are necessarily brutal).
It is a crying shame that the public debate has served to divide women and provoke us into criticising each other. But that probably makes life easier for those in power ? in medicine, in the NHS, in politics ? because then they don't have to deal with the real problem here which is the sometimes appalling level of service and support offered to pregnant and labouring women. It's easier to blame women for being too posh to push than it is to recruit and train more midwives, provide better facilities, more anaesthetists, more support for home birth, challenge current policies on inductions, etc. etc. etc.
For what it's worth, I had a vaginal delivery. But there was only one midwife to seven women. Which was extremely dangerous. I shudder to think what would have happened if things had gone wrong, if my baby had been in distress. I'm pretty damn sure if the midwife had actually been around I could have avoided a third degree tear. Which is now going to cost the NHS a lot of money because the resulting damage is going to need intervention. And may mean if there ever is a next time I end up having to have a caesarian ? even though I don't want one.

I think it may depend oh the hospital aloha...i was very out of it with my first, slept all day which ive never heard of from anyone whos had one at my local hospital where my second was performed. Sure enough...after the second i was awake and completely normal afterwards and up and about very quickly.

well said eddm.

One midwife to seven women?????????? That is appalling and its figures like that that make me think I will go for a third section rather than risk a VBA2C. I don't trust the NHS to cope in a crisis.

My unit provides one-to-one midwife care. Fancy a trip to Scotland?

I also had 1:1 midwife care in Glasgow (except for 10 minutes in the middle when a lady came into the room next door, there was suddenly a lot of activity and a couple of minutes later, a baby's cry. Meanwhile....!). Went through 2 midwives/shifts, and was nearly onto the 3rd as I took so long!

But they are trying to shut that hospital down

Willow.... Odent also believes forceps should never be used.... women should have section rather than forceps!
Hospital (like St George in London) who are reducing their induction rate (refusing induction before 42 weeks) are seeing a lowering of their section rate....
Prof. Pam Loughna who was on Woman's Hour on Wednesday (she is a senior lecturer in Obstetrics) said that you could not make a direct link between the fall of infant mortality and the increase rate of caesareans.... meaning because we do more sections doesn't mean we have less dead babies.... so the increase caesareans are not to save more babies.

Mears and I regularely post that inductions and interventions (including epridural) really increases your chance of sections.... because babies get distressed !

NICE also says that home birth have a much lower rate of sections... as a doula I see that when we have a home birth and babies are having a slow heartbeat- which in hospital would mean ventouse at the best of times... at home we get the mum in different position, the slow heart rate is often due to chord pressure, moving the pelvis often helps ! And there is not a higher infant mortality and morbidity rate at home either.

But don't you agree that targets are not the answer, but more midwives, more support for home births for those who want them and better practise is?

But wouldn't you expect a lower level of c-section from home births anyway since these are women who have often been 'selected' (for want of a better word) as being low risk?

TOTALLY - I have no problem with sections - you know that.... they are there for a reason... I have a big problem for section for failure to progress..... I think the hospital is to blame for that quite often !

hmb - many women who have sections are low risk to start off.... it's when they get induced (most women wanting a home birth will go to lengths to avoid the induction) or when they fail to progress (which you don't have so much at home as the atmosphere is far mopre condusive to good labours) that the section is performed.

Too many postings to read so apologies if am repeating something that has already been said. Had a lovely elective section for no other reason than we wanted one 10 months ago for the following reasons; could decide when baby arrived as have busy life and husband so we could plan, hate pain and the whole lack of dignity which would of felt if made to have 'natural' birth and finally I have a lovely and enjoyable sex life which would have changed if large baby had made his entrance the other way! Outcome should be happy and healthy baby and mummy and daddy and if they want c-sections we should jolly well have them! ....am going to be so unpopular with this I can feel it....ho-hum

agree with pupuce - it was certianly my experience. I suspect that my induction will end up leading to 3 sections unless I try for a VBA2C. It certainly led to my first 2. In fact I don't think it was the induction itself (not the pessaries anyway) as they seemed to kick start labour nicely- it was the interference that followed. breaking my waters when I was less than 1cm dilated FFS- that HAS to be bad practice- and that did lead directly to me being flat on my back unable to move as I was in so much pain. Then failure to progress- hardly suprising.

Smurfs, it's your choice, it's obviously been a lovely birth for you and your DH

What did you have?

I too think that electing to have a section to avoid horrendous perineal damage is a perfectly valid request. In fact, when I've quietly (unusual for me ) put forward my reasons to medical types, they readily agree with me. My GP said that to come away with an intact perineum seems to be luck these days, not the norm.

Many women feel the need for a vaginal birth for it all to be 'real'. That's cool - my sister had 1 OK vag birth and the second was like a fairy tale, even though it was in hospital. I love listening to that story - it really was magical.

However, for us women who don't want/'need' the vaginal experience, I'm sick of being told that having a section isn't real childbirth.

However, having followed this thread in detail, I'm very much in agreement that NICE needs to throw its weight behind a campaign for more midwives, better training and a 500% increase in GOOD homebirths. Demanding a fall in the section rate is only going to result in more women being abused during childbirth, resulting in a lifetime of pain

Highlander, had a DS who is fantastic and would like to have more but am worried that on the back of the NICE guidelines it would be more difficult to have another C-section. I personally don't feel that I missed out by not having a vaginal birth the whole idea leaves me cold and my greatest fear when I was pregnant was that I wouldn't get to the hospital quickly enough and it would be suggested (which it was) that I try for a natural birth. I think you have to believe in your right to have the birth that will make you happy as elective c-sections go against current thinking and a very supportive DH really does help!

Am not sure that I'm posting on the right thread, having not read this all through and there was a similar one somewhere else.

The reason I avoided a c-section with my first (born back to back and labour would have been unbearable without an epidural) was because of my ob. It was hard to push, but I did because of her. The care and commitment she had for me and the the fact that she knew me and believed in me was what got me through without one. And it's because she knew me. Consistency of care seems to be very undervalued in the NHS. Tackle that and the more obvious problem of needing more midwives (necessary to solve the problem) and I've got a feeling that more women will have the births they want. (Maybe less c-sections, too.. Who knows and I for one, don't care. Birth on the NHS scared me so much I considered going home to have my child.)

JJ, glad it worked for you and you got the birth you wanted, but do wish that when/if we do get more midwives they are less opionated and hostile about women choosing to have sections as at the end of the day it is not their body.

Mears, I would have my next (if it happens) in your unit but would need a terribly long labour to get up to Scotland from the South East...
PS you may be interested to know it was Tommy's 'midwife-led' birth unit that had one midwife to seven women. They couldn't transfer me to the hospital birth centre because there was also only one midwife there. Outrageous.

Highlander - lots of intact perineums where I work Was at a lovely delivery today of a first baby (boy) who eased his way beautifully and gently into the world - not a tear in sight. It can be done and is done more often than you think

Did anyone see the report in the Observer with a professor of obstetrics saying that an elective c-section birth was safer for babies than a vaginal delivery? Also pointed out that the NICE report contained very misleading statistics?

I did read it but hasn't it always been the case that doctors would opt for CS whereas midwives would opt for VB? If I mostly saw it when it 'went wrong' I might be put off VB as well.

It wasn't based on observation, actually, but on looking at studies. I wish I could do links!
I was very pleased to read it.