Active discussions

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Childbirth

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

Original poster

No more C sections ???

29 replies

Flower3554 · 30/01/2007 08:07

I've just heard in the news that a couple of North East hospitals are refusing to carry out C sections to avoid being sued if the op goes wrong.

Has anyone else heard this.

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Set a reminder
belgo · 30/01/2007 08:15

But what if a c section is a medical neccessity (sp)?

Original poster
Flower3554 · 30/01/2007 08:50

Not sure there belgo, I'm waiting for the local news bulletin to see if there is any more info.

OP posts:
lissielou · 30/01/2007 08:51

fume rant fume

Original poster
Flower3554 · 30/01/2007 09:04

Ok, bear with me while I try to decipher my notes, the newsreader gabbled away so hopefully I at least got the gist.

Hexham General and North Tyneside will no longer carry out planned c sections. This is because litigious patients have made it impossible to carry these out.

There was no mention of emergency c-sections so goodness knows what will happen in those circumstances.

I feel sorry for the Mums who were expecting to give birth in these hospitals

OP posts:
expatinscotland · 30/01/2007 09:09

Gimme a break.

The NHS paid out £68m in negligence compensation last year on 10 cases of birth/labour mismanagement.

£68m they could have pumped into providing decent maternity service.

I don't get it.

I thought a nation's children were its most valuable asset, since they are its future.

But of course, if it doesn't line hte pockets of the fat cats, it isn't worth 10p somehow.

piglit · 30/01/2007 09:17

This is just more of the health service propaganda that elective section = too posh to push. Just because a section isn't an "emergency" doesn't mean it isn't a necessity.

abgirl · 30/01/2007 09:18

here for details of this

DaisyMOO · 30/01/2007 09:18

I expect what they mean is that they will no longer carry out elective CS at maternal request, so planned sections for medical reasons (however they define this), emergency CS will still be carried out.

I dont' quite understand your point expat. Do you mean they shouldn't be paying out for negligence?

belgo · 30/01/2007 09:19

good point piglit.

expatinscotland · 30/01/2007 09:21

Um, no, Daisy, at no point did I write they shouldn't pay out for negligence.

£68m can go a long way to providing decent maternity care so that perhaps we won't have so many mismanaged births that result in court action for negligence.

No telling what was spent on legal costs, £68m was just the compensation payout.

lemonaid · 30/01/2007 09:35

From the story, it doesn't seem to be "because litigious patients have made it impossible to carry these out" or anything to do with "too posh to push" -- rather that the hospitals in question don't have consultants on hand, on-call theatre teams and a high-dependency unit, and current guidelines say that they should have them to do planned c-sections. Yes, it's the department-in-charge-of-not-getting-sued that's put the guidelines in place, but they seem like reasonable standards to have. A c-section is significant surgery and should if possible be done somewhere that has the facilities to handle any possible complications, IMO.

DaisyMOO · 30/01/2007 09:57

No, I know you didn't expat, I was juyst confused. Trouble is, to save money you have to invest and that's what they seem to be struggling with.

I am absolutely certain that babies and mothers are dying because of underinvestment in maternity services, there was a statement from the Royal College of Midwives to this effect yesterday, but where's the public outcry?

expatinscotland · 30/01/2007 09:58

I think this is just a means to try to force more parents to pay privately for their own maternity care.

What a shame.

A society which does not value its children is a truly poor one.

Highlander · 30/01/2007 19:12

I live in the NE and believe me, you wouldn't want a CS at NT! Shame about Hexham, but there have been situations where mum has been given a CS there and the baby taken into Newcastle for SCBU. Mum obviously is unfit to travel so they are separated for a few days.

Sorry - makes sense to ensure all CSs are done at the RVI in Newcastle.

Nettee · 31/01/2007 13:29

If they are midwife led units - as it says in the article - then the emergency sections would not be done there either. A bit shocking that they have been doing elective sections there before without the proper back up.

nogoes · 31/01/2007 13:36

Most elective c-sections carried out in the NHS are for medical reasons (e.g breech or previous complicated labour) so I don't understand this at all. The too posh to push brigade (which I am sure is a myth anyway) would be carried out privately.

funkimummy · 31/01/2007 13:39

Gees I would have been screwed then!! Both my c-sections were planned due to complications in which myself or my children could have died!!

Glad I don't live there!

nutcracker · 31/01/2007 13:41

Exactly Piglet.

I have had 3 section, 2 elective and 1 emergency. I had to have the 2 elective ones, there was no debate, I had to and that was that.

lulumama · 31/01/2007 13:43

this is confined to one midwife led unit in the north east..and from what i know...MLUs do not take high risk pregnancies, so would not have the back up for sections......this is not a countrywide plan.......

marymillington · 31/01/2007 13:43

maybe i'm reading too much between the lines in the article but it seems to me that its more about a more "strategic" management agenda ( ie someone wants the unit shut) than C/S per se.

that said i find it extraordinary that a hospital is no longer prepared to carry out medical procedures because of fear of being sued...what's next? sorry, we can't look after sick people....

LaDiDaDi · 31/01/2007 13:48

I too live in the North East and think that the requirements are sensible but agree that it is unfortuante for women who live in the affected areas.

I do think it will mean a need for more staff and possibly another op theatre at the RVI though as the two theatres on delivery suite are often very stretched already.

Skribble · 31/01/2007 13:48

Its not like mums to be say oh I think I will have a section is it, they are almost always becuse of certain conditions or previous difficult deliveries.

I had a planned section for my second, as my first labour took 48hrs and ended up in an emergency section, (baby to big) so they weren't even talking about letting me go into labour.

Perhaps it is just in reference to those few who choose to have a section and is to discourage them from using the NHS to have an unesesary op. Wonder how many are actualy like this anyway.

Even the "too posh to push" celebrity brigade may have had medical reasons we will never know about as it is private between a mum to be and their consultant.

LaDiDaDi · 31/01/2007 13:49

Oh Higlander, pop over to the meet ups thread if you are from the North East!

LaDiDaDi · 31/01/2007 13:50

It's not only for maternal choice sections, it's for all elective c sections regardless of the reason for it.

lemonaid · 31/01/2007 14:35

If you're having a c-section because of "complications in which myself or my children could have died" would you really choose to have it at a hospital with no consultant, no on-call theatre team and no high-dependency unit ?

All this change seems to be doing is taking away the "right" to plan to have a c-section somewhere (like these two hospitals) that doesn't have good facilities for carrying out c-sections. I also can't have an elective c-section in my GP's office, for example, because they don't have the facilities and it's Not A Good Idea. Not all medical establishments are equipped to handle all medical procedures.

Yes, it does seem that there's a wider plan to run down maternity services at those two hospitals, and IMO that is to be deplored, but I really can't get worked up about the c-section issue alone.