MNHQ here: are you interested in the issue of medical consent during childbirth?

[RowanMumsnet]

Hello

One of the charities we work with, MASIC, is holding an event in London (sorry!) on Thursday 29 November to discuss the issue of medical consent in childbirth, and how that issue ties in to obstetric anal sphincter injuries (third or fourth degree tears that damage your anus, with often life-changing consequences) and the provision of elective caesarian sections.

It's a day-long event (9.15 to 4.30) with panels and debates on topics including:

an explanation of the Montgomery vs Lanarkshire ruling (a landmark case that established a legal standard for women's right to information about risk in childbirth);
a panel on anal injuries in childbirth and what the risk factors are (and what might be the effect of offering more caesarian sections by maternal request);
a panel entitled 'How much do we inform mothers beforehand without scaring?' [imagine there will be some strong MN views on this one...]; and
a panel called 'does consent mean anything when you're exhausted and in pain?'

Throughout the day, people who come along will be able to contribute and ask questions and generally make their views known.

Tickets are £40, or £25 for students or women with obstetric anal sphincter injuries. You can book tickets and see more info here.

We thought this would be of interest to some of you - and of course the issues being discussed are likely to interest lots of you whether you can attend or not - we at MNHQ are thinking about doing something in this area (what does it mean to give meaningful consent to procedures in childbirth, and what's the best way to ensure that women have all the information that they need to give meaningful consent) - so as ever please let us know what you think.

A member of MNHQ will be going along to represent your views, so give us a shout if you buy tickets and would like to have a coffee on the day.

Thanks
MNHQ

[ABingThing]

Would knowing your risk profile and the pros and cons of c section, forceps, ventouse etc make you more likely to request a c section, and is that such a bad thing?

I found out my risks (1:5 change of anal tearing with a VB vs. stillbirth risk halved with a CS) and chose a CS. The only bad thing about it was my consultant trying to convince me that the risks were secondary to "don't you want to feel like you've tried?".

My plea around language is to stop making it sound like a CS is automatically a bad thing

[Notnowokay]

Would knowing your risk profile and the pros and cons of c section, forceps, ventouse etc make you more likely to request a c section, and is that such a bad thing?

No, it would make me choose the best option for me. The cons of c-section are not something to belittle, neither is the vaginal delivery mode. Both can go wrong, so both risks should be taught.

[Booboostwo]

I chose CS because of my assessment of the relative risks. I explained my reasoning to my consultant and he said fine...his first child is brain damaged because of complications during VB. He admits it changed his view on who gets to make the decision.

[AutumnCrow]

Thanks for your update, @AnnaCMumsnet

Much appreciated