Why is everyone so anti elective c-section?

[Gangle]

I'm only 7 weeks pregnant but am sure I want an elective c-section. I've read extensively around the subject and think I'm well informed on the pros and cons of elective c-section v VBAC but it seems there is so much stigma attached to elective c-sections and that people will do/say anything to attempt to dissuade you from having one. Just wondering why there isn't more respect for your wishes about how you want to give birth.

Yes, the baby's brain also released hormones once it's passing into the birth canal to help it cope with the process, so that it comes out more ready to breathe air, and, as someone else mentioned, the pressure from the walls of vagina and contractions also help expel fluid from the lungs, again, preparing it to breathe.

WWW, unfortunately, increasing numbers of young women also read about/see on TV 'celebrities' like Jordan and Victoria Beckham having csections and think it's really the way to go.

Yes EPIs, I'm sure that's the case. Which is why discussions like this are so important imo. And the idea that section = easy option really needs challenge I think.

Thanks for yr detailed response Klaw. I know that babies are designed for birth but seem to recall a recent TV documentary explaining why modern woman has not evolved to be great at it (something to do with narrow pelvises methinks!). Sorry - I'm not really qualified to comment on the medical stuff - but I think we can both agree that the midwifery services in the UK need more money and support.

But ..forgive me ... think attributing rise in c-section to being possible cause of rise in mental health and crime rates ....perhaps a leap too far

We definitely need more research though and still uphold Gangle's view that there should be more room for individual choice IF baby's health is not compromised and we are prepared to pay ...

Would also contest view that those "opting" for caesareans are doing so because they see it as the "easy option" which of course it is not.

expat I agree, Gangle should buy the section she wants but doesn't need and leave the NHS to do other things with the money.
As I said Gangle I don't care how someone gives birth, but I do care about NHS resources. I think it is a great shame that you are chosing to have a section when you don't need one.

'Modern' woman have shorter and narrower pelvises (and spines) from their ape counterparts because of bi-pedal locomotion not because they are not on the whole capable of giving birth without surgical intervention.

The trade-off is that the human baby is born much less developed because of a shortened gestation period so the human mother can walk upright on two limbs.

incapable, sorry.

Again, have no qualifications about this so apologies if talking through my hat but surely being bi-pedal and therefore having narrow pelvises make it more difficult to give birth and one follows from the other (wasn't suggesting the reverse)?

Anyway, I agree it's a specious argument in a way as I'm just trying to support Gangle's view that there is a stigma surrounding elective c-sections which doesn't respect individual choice with regard to childbirth. I fully support (and admire) those who wish to give birth naturally. But everyone reacts differently to pain, everyone has different anxiety levels about different things. Everyone has different backgrounds and influences and pressures. Sometimes those anxieties - in other people's opinions - may be misplaced. But they are none the less real to the sufferer.

'Again, have no qualifications about this so apologies if talking through my hat but surely being bi-pedal and therefore having narrow pelvises make it more difficult to give birth and one follows from the other (wasn't suggesting the reverse)? '

No, it generally means that the human baby is born less developed than the next nearest ape, the chimp.

That's the evolutinary trade-off: lesser developed baby. And less developed baby = lower survival rate on the whole because cave mama would have to carry baby whilst running away from lionness because cave baby couldn't ride along by clutching her fur a la chimp baby.

I actually don't disagree with you Countingthegreyhairs - Everyone does have different backgrounds and influences and pressures. The problem with celebrities apparently having "easy" c-sections because they wanted them is that c-sections start being perceived as normal and not for the major surgery that they are. It also doesn't help allay the low level fear that many pregnant women will understandably have - espcially first timers, as it is fear of the unknown.

expat -- The change to upright walking and smaller pelvises happened thousands upon thousands of years ago, so I don't think that's particularly relevant to the very recent rise in c-section rates. It does, however, explain why we need assistance in birth, unlike other primates. Human babies are also much larger (in terms of percentage of parents' weight) than most baby animals.

The big recent difference is that babies' birth weights have increased dramatically in the past century or so, in the food-abundant parts of the world. Quoting from Birth: The Surprising History of How We Are Born, by Tina Cassidy, "In Britain and America, a typical newborn weighs in at about 7 pounds, 8 ounces. ... Indian babies... average about 6 pounds." The author of this really interesting book seems to think that suddenly higher birth weights are contributing to the rise in C-sections.

The book also has a great chapter on C-sections.

I wasn't the one who brought that up as the reason for the rise in csection rates, aikigypsy.

Countinghairs did, thanks!

Sorry! Easy to lose track with all these messages flying in so fast.

Gangle, I agree there are a lot of people who are anti-section. But, there is a reason - giving birth the "normal" way is preferable and a section should be a last resort. I've had two sections, one crash section after my baby got stuck and one elective as I did not want to go through all the trauma involved in a crash section again.
Both sections were fine, recovery-wise. there is a lot of scaremongering in my opinion about how awful it is and how people couldn't hold their baby or breastfeed, or move etc. I had no issues with this with either baby and was up walking about the next day with both babies (changing nappies etc) But people are different and some cope better than others.
However, even though both my sections were fine (the elective was actually great! ) If I could get over the nightmare of when my first baby was born then I would opt for a natural delivery.
If you have a phobia of labour your consultant can probably arrange for you to see a counsellor to help you to discuss this issue.

Oh Klaw, I am disappointed to see your post about Michael Odent and the mental "damage" eletive sections do to babies. I always thought you were a highly sensible "voice of reason" person even if I don't always agree with you!

You've got to consider furture pregnancies as well - how if you've had a previous section then you're more at risk of placental abbruption, low lying placenta, miscarriage and uterine rupture. Sure the risk is small, but if you're the person it happens to and you know that its because you chose to have a section previously then it probably won't be much comfort.

Plus there's the extra cost to the NHS. Sections are about 3k more expensive.

Elective c sections are not performed just because you want one for lots of reasons

1. Its major abdominal surgery. This in its self is a risk of things like post op infection, embolisms, bleeding.
2. They are expensive so unless you are prepared to pay the NHS will not. Funds can be better used.
3. Re iterate all of kiskidees comments about clearing the infants airways and bf.
4. Having an epidural for the birth even without having a c section carries the risk of nerve damage to the back if not put in correctly.
5. I to was out of hospital in less than 2 days, however, after major abdominal surgery you are advised not to drive until you can do a safe emergency stop, which is after at least a few weeks.

Having had a section because it was needed, I would not personally recommend having an elective one unless the circumstances leading to a previous cesarian dictate it would be safer for mother and baby.

I may well need another this time and am not looking forward to it.

Has gangle ever said why she wants an elective c-section? I've looked over the thread but can't see her reason.

I had 2 elective CSs. First was my birth choice, made as soon as I found out I was pregnant. Just as well, as DS1 was oblique with a huge head - I shudder to think what kind of hideous birth I might have been bullied into.

DS2 was also an elective.

Both great exoeriences (but that's just luck) and I was up and about within a few hours both times.

Breastfeeding was never a problem - DS1 fed for 18mo. Still BF DS2 at nealy 11mo.

Re the gagging baby stories - formula fed babies were the only ones gagging and throwing up on my ward. DS1 hocked up mucous twice the first night - DS2 did this once. It makes me weep thinking of all those poor babies having formula rammed down their throats, throwing it all back up again

If it's what you want Gangle - go for it.

she doesn't have to justify her birth choice

highlander - im not asking you to justify it, i am just curious about your reasons to have csection