Natural C-Sections offered at queen Charlottes Hospital Hmm

[JingleyJen]

Hmmmm

link

Just seen one on the news it looked really amazing...had heard of them but never seen one.

awwww
sounded really sweet, much better than a slash, tug, there you go kind of c section.

I saw a couple of these on TV last year, and was blown away by the concept. Why not? Fantastic idea, the parents can be more in touch with the birth of their baby, and the baby benefits from bringing the process a little closer to the natural way. And if anything goes less than absolutely well - they are already in an OT surrounded by experts and equipment.

it sounds lovely.if(when) we have another baby i would want this type of birth!

I think that if there is a way to improve the operation, to make parents feel more satisfied with the experience, that it should be done. Some people are happy with their c-section experiences and some people are not (and yet have no choice in the matter because they are not in a position of being able to have a vaginal delivery). So if those people who for whatever medical reason (including tokophobia) are having c-sections that would have some similarities to a vaginal birth, I don;t think that can be a bad thing.

But then I may be talking crap, never having had a c-section. I do have friends who have had elective c-sections that were very much not wanted though (breech baby, pre-existing medical conditions and so on) and who were not ecstatic with the "operation" aspect of the birth.

I take it from the time taken and the setting that these could only take place when they are elective rather than emergency c-sections (failure to progress/distress and so on) and would worry that there might be a temptation to cut out the labour aspect and go straight to the "natural" c-section.

Firstly, I absolutely agree that anything that anything thast can be done to 'humanise' the c-section experience is not a bad thing. Even in elective situations, ther's still an element of 'slash-and-grab' which isn't beneficial for mother or baby. I don't see why anyone would object to many of the changes suggested here.

However... I do object, very strongly, to the use of the word 'natural' to describe these operations. There is nothing 'natural' about a c-section and to describe it as such is ridiculous. A section should be necessary (for whatever reason), it may be wanted, it should be gently and sensitively performed, but it is not 'natural' and no amount of aromatherapy oil burning in theatre will make it so.

I find it interesting that this is being pioneered by Nicholas Fisk, an obstetrician who is quite vocal in his opinion that c-section is the safest and most desirable method of delivery for all women, regardless of individual risk (and certainly regardless of vast amounts of evidence to the contrary).

I'm not making value judgements here, but I do worry that this kind of 'advance' is actually a step towards normalising the surgical route to childbirth. C-section rates need to fall, not rise...

if it makes for a happy mum and safe live birth delivery - great call it what you want, the cut 'n' caress

Snaf, step away...

C'mon, spillage - you know you want to enter the fray

LSCS surely can never be natural
It is a surgical procedure involving incising the abdominal wall and uterus.
Would prefer it if he called it something else.
Slightly less traumatic CS perhaps

I would really want one of these - anything which increases choice, fine by me

I wish my c-section had been like that - the lack of immediate skin to skin contact made me really sad - dd was out and taken to another room to be checked (I made dh go with them )- and my first sight of her was all bundled up in a blanket - I could only see her wee eyes peeking at me. Then she stopped breathing - and I do always wonder whether that would have happened if we'd had skin to skin contact immediately.

Now I've heard of these.. but didn't realise that someone had started doing them in England.

I really wanted to see when my DTs came into the world but as I pulled the blue screen my hands were taken away. It would've been fascinating! Ah well.... sigh... not my joy but another woman's!

No doubt they use the word natural, to make it sound more appealing and less surgical?!

I have seen this on the tv (the live birth programme on ages ago) and it was very interesting to watch, especially watching the mucus coming out of the nose.

If it can take a little of the trauma away from the baby then it has to be a good thing. C-sections will always be necessary, so if they can be improved that's great.

i think (and i may get flamed here) that although cs's shouldn't be seen as the "easy option" there is still a tendancy to believe that a cs should only really happen if it absolutely has to, thus lending it an air of urgency and panic. like it or not some women DO need a cs and i think its fab that there is a way to make it feel more natural and the mother feel more in control.

why shouldnt the mother see her babybeing born?
why shouldnt the mother have skin to skin?
why shouldnt the mother be able to give birth gently?

so because she hasnt had the labour side ofbirth she (and the baby) should be punished?

I will be having my 4th CS in April and would love this option but it certainly won't be available in my hospital.

I think it sounds great (although I agree that the use of the term 'natural' is dodgy). I had an elective c-section (dd transverse), and I wish it could have been like this. I'm happy enough with my birth experience; after a complicated pregnancy I was just extatic that she was there; having a c-section was always the thing that bothered me least of all the complications that I was potentially at risk for. However, did not have skin-to-skin contact with her until we were back on the ward, and they took her away from me (and dh) while I was in recovery. I do wish they would have been more respectful of my (and her) need to be close to each other, so I'm all in favour of this.

Hmm, I'm personally thinking the useof the word natural here is inappropritae, plus apart from the umbilical cord, plus please correct me if I'm wrong here but can't you get most of the 'extras' he has added to call it 'natural' on a normal cs anyway??? All he has really done is prolonged the length of timebefore thye cut the cord, you can have the screen lowered so you can see baby, your partner can dut the cord/sex the baby, you can have skin-to-skin, you can ask for all checks to be done on your abdomen as soon as they can be sure breathing is established (ie when baby cries)etc etc, it's juts that people don't know they can ask for these things and may not get them as they can't really fight the surgeon for it when they cant move!

In my hospital the recovery room is also used for women who have had gynae procedures, some of whom may never be able to have children, so out of respect to them, babies are not allowed in recovery so the idea of skin-to-skin is out of the question.

Whhaaaaaaaaaaaat? Yet another reason that women who are having babies should not be put in the same place as those who have lost one or are having other surgical procedures.

I did this see this on the news last night and thought that lots of Drs around the country would now be cursing the hospital!!

VS I had no idea that you could ask for all of those things tho DH did cut the cord. It certainly wasn't something that was discussed at my NCT classes - maybe it should be?

That's the point meeping not many do know this. Just because it is a surgical birth doesn't mean you don't have rights. I didn't know much until I started planning for my VBAC and was told I could also plan an el-cs (obvs it's diff with a crash cs, but even with an em cs you should be able to have much of what you ask for).
I personally think that anyone pg should consider that they may end up with a cs and write their birth plan/preferences accordingly. Klaw linked me this a while ago and it has the main options for cs's on.