Why are so many women anti c-section?

[jivegirl]

Despite planning a peaceful waterbirth at home, I ended up having a very scary OP/ventouse delivery with my daugher nearly 2 years ago (delayed second stage, retained placenta, 3rd degree tear, plus internal tearing which had not healed after 6 months and required cauterising)

I have been offered a C-section and will see the consultant again to make my decision in just over a week. At present (35wks) bump is transverse, so the decision to have a section may yet be taken out of my hands. However part of me is secretly hoping the baby stays transverse so I don't have to justify having a section.

I can't understand why so many women seem to be anti-sections. It seems admitting a preference for a section is almost taboo.
I still get horrific flashbacks to delivering my daughter and can't think of anything worse than going through that again (my DP rates it as the most traumatic day of his life!! ) The thought of a calm, planned c-section sounds like bliss. Am I being naive?

I should also say that I will have excellent support from friends and family to help me cope with caring for an active toddler and a newborn in the weeks that follow - so I am sure I am luckier than many..

Would love to hear some opinions on this ladies!

The situation doesn't have to be as extreme as riven's to cost the NHS a lot either. My DD is OK now (even though I'm not), but I must have cost the NHS a load of money in counselling, trips to the GP, appointments with counsultants etc. etc. after my VB. And it's still going on. And that's just the financial implications. I'd like to think that we would consider the emotional cost of a lot of VBs too. I agree with riven that it really is a hidden problem.

How is it 'judgy' to talk about the risks of c-section?

The research is pretty clear on this: that elective c-section for low risk mums is more risky than attempting a vaginal birth.

That's why doctors generally discourage women from having c-sections unless there's a medical necessity.

Nobody has argued that there are no risks of vaginal birth, or homebirth.

In fact I've pointed out that babies born vaginally sometimes need special care.

I'm sorry you feel like a failure - you shouldn't do. You've done nothing to deserve it.

It's entirely your decision jivegirl and having had a very similar first delivery to yours (OP/ventouse/bad tear/surgery later to correct/baby in SCBU) I was very nervous about having dd2 just 19 months later. However it was a lovely birth and it was helpful in balancing the traumatic memories of dd1s arrival, both for me and dh. However, you do what's best for you, your dp and your baby -good luck either way.

But Athene - face facts: there isn't enough money to go around.

At the moment we've got a situation where there are women ending up having emergency sections because the care they get in labour is seriously inadequate. And the reason why the care they are getting is so inadequate is because there aren't enough midwives to provide appropriate care. The government argues that we have more midwives than ever before, and this is true. But it's also true that our c-section rate is DOUBLE what it was 10 years ago and this has hugely added to the workload of those maternity care staff.

Something has got to give, and what's 'giving' is the care and attention needed to help mums having vaginal births safely through their labours.

It's in everyone's interests that the C-section rate is brought down, and there are many hospitals which have managed to do this WITHOUT increasing the risks to mums and babies.

We all know that women labouring in NHS hospitals are often having horrible experiences - I just think it's sad that so many people seem to think that the best answer to this is to offer everyone elective c-sections as an alternative to going through labour. What about offering women better support during birth? Of one to one care from an unharrassed midwife, perhaps - shock - one they might have met before going into labour? What about better birth environments?

I know what a HUGE difference really good care makes. I've had three complicated labours - one in an NHS consultant led unit, two at home with a midwife I knew. Good care, sympathetic care from someone you trust REALLY makes a difference to how you feel about the birth, even when it's not gone smoothly.

Of course there's a place for c-section and there always will be, but god, I don't want us to become like the US where you seem to have two options: horrible vaginal birth with loads of routine interventions which so often ends in surgery anyway, or opting for an elective in the first place because in light of the alternative it's the logical way to go!

"The research is pretty clear on this: that elective c-section for low risk mums is more risky than attempting a vaginal birth. "

That research is not clear. There are plenty of obstetricians who would argue that caesarean is always safer. I personally wouldn't go that far. But, I do think the risk is pretty low. And I think we need to put "major surgery" into perspective. I mean it's more major than the removal of an ingrown toenail, but it isn't exactly open heart surgery either.

I know several stories of babies who are permanently damaged due to vaginal births that should have been sections. I don't know any babies who were damaged for life because of a section delivery.

I had four midwives around me for my (traumatic) VB in a CLU, not including the three midwives who had looked after me for my very long labour in the MLU. I'm sure that I hogged a lot more midwife-hours than someone who had an elective CS.

in our area they have a target to reduce the number of ceasarians. Fine you think but instead of allowing full mobility during labour, women at the first hint of failure to progress are strapped prone to a bed on a monitor- that will help. All possible interventions are done (in my case artificially breaking hind waters but lo was still not engaged ) and then when they can tick every box that shows them to have made every possible effort, we are whisked into surgery

Oh please, I dream about the US medical system. I do so want a medical system just like it.

Okay, so there are funding issues. But, why is it you think it's reasonable to cut maternity services? And who are you to decide how I should have a baby? (not that I'm having any more because I am not)

I've not read this thread, so I'm just answering the OP.

I had an emergency GA CS at 31 weeks and it saved my daughters life. I was fully dilated, progressing very rapidly and she was descending feet first.

As much as I know that section was necessary, I know that many women are having them unnecessarily. I don't have a problem with them being done when there is no other option.

With the age of "science" 50ish years ago births moved into the hospital and were done by doctors and everyone involved was fully gowned as if for theatre. Births have become medicalised, we've lost our natural instincts to birth naturally (read The Water Birth Book, even if you aren't interested in one) and MWs have lost some of their skills. Medical interference causes problems with the labour* and increases the need for a section. Often doctors are quick to give a section that isn't needed because they see it as a controlled risk, even if the risks of a natural birth are lower than the risks of a section (for example allowing a breech to deliver) the doctor prefers to take the risk he can control. It's also been known for a doctor to do a section because it's Friday and he doesn't want to have to come in over the weekend to do it if the labour goes wrong.

• In the wild a mammal has to give birth in a quiet spot where they won't be in danger. If she is disturbed she releases adrenalin that slows down the contractions allowing her to escape. Too much interference with a human mother in a hospital has the same effect.

I'm now 22 months post section. I'm still in a lot of pain, my back is a mess (physio said it's a lot to do with my section and I'm fortunate I didn't have it awake) my scar hurts all the time, I can't walk far, because of all that I can't lose my baby weight, in fact I'm gaining because I can't move enough, when she was tiny I couldn't carry Tink in the car seat, so always had to get others to help and I struggle to carry her now. I also reacted the the GA, my first ever and I was ill for a week.

It's major abdominal surgery. We forget that because it's done awake and because it's delivering our children. The risks are far greater than those of a vaginal birth - yes for some people they are lifesavers, but they should be just that lifesavers! Not given out for convenience sake! They are expensive and dangerous!

Hi Riven,
Can I ask you a quick question about your 3 CS's please. I've had CS's and am trying for my 4th baby and would have to have another CS (due to medical reasons). Did your doctors worry you with statistics etc. on having 3 CS's? I've heard of alot of women have 1/2 CS's but not 3+. Did you recover ok after the 3rd? Was it a difficult CS because of the old scar tissue?

Thanks

"Childbirth is risky whether its VB or CS and everyone should get the full facts"

Sorry Riven but it's down to the individual how they feel about this.

I do not think it's right to tell people that birth is 'risky'. Give women the facts and let them make up their own minds.

The vast, vast majority of women get through birth without serious long term injury to themselves or their child.

It's a matter of perspective. You're in the unfortunate position of having had a difficult birth which resulted in a poorly baby, so you perceive the risks differently.

And if you think it's rational for women to be told of all the risks of childbirth why not sit them down and go through with them every single thing that can go wrong with pregancy, and going through in minute detail all the illnesses and diseases that babies and small children can get?

Do you honestly think this would improve the quality of most people's lives, or would it result in even more anxiety, depression and dysfunctional labours than we already have?

I'm not arguing for women to be deliberately deceived about these things, but we do need to keep a sense of perspective surely? There is no way of fully preparing people for all the tragedies we may face in childbearing - not without destroying the peace of mind and pleasure in pregnancy of the majority of women who are likely to have normal labours resulting in healthy babies.

I meet so many women who are CRIPPLED with anxiety about their mostly completely normal pregnancies already, TERRIFIED of giving birth and then depressed because of all the anxiety they experience in the first few weeks and months of their babies lives. Honestly the last thing most women need is more negativity. You have to draw the line somewhere.

That's right, surgar coat everything and don't let women worry their pretty little head about the important things. Just blindly follow the advice and if something goes wrong and you have a damaged baby, well it'll be the quickest view of the backside of the NHS you ever saw.

If a woman wants all the facts, give them to her!

"Oh please, I dream about the US medical system. I do so want a medical system just like it."

What a system which spends three times as much money on every single mother but is WAAAAAY down the list of safest places to give birth?! Lower down than countries like the Netherlands whose c-section rate is about half that of the States? Lower down the infant and maternal mortality tables than two thirds of the other developed countries in the world where most women have midwifery led maternity care?

Why on earth would you want this? Maternity care in the US is in a state of crisis - this is something that's widely acknowledged in international midwifery and obstetric circles.

"Okay, so there are funding issues. But, why is it you think it's reasonable to cut maternity services?"

No - it's absolutely not reasonable. And nobody here has argued for this! It's not about cutting funding, it's about using the money which is currently available to the best possible effect - to keep as many women and babies as safe as possible.

I would absolutely LOVE for more money to be available, but if it was and it was a choice between providing more one to one care for mums in labour or providing more elective c-sections for low risk mums for whom c-section isn't a medical necessity...... well, I think I'd prefer to have the money spent on providing more midwives on labour wards, because I think it would result in more healthy babies, fewer emergency c-sections and fewer traumatised women.

Why is your choice to decide what is best for everyone else. Have you considered that my choice is right for me and yours is right for you? No one on this thread is telling you you can't have the birth you want. But, for some reason you can only see your way as right and my way as wrong.

I think people should be able to make their own choices.

And my view of the American medical system is not based on any statistics -- just person experience. But, if you want to talk about statistics, can you tell me what the comparison is for waiting times? Or how about the number of obstetricians to number of babies born in a year.

You know, riven, people are liable to slap you if you go round saying that in RL.

Do you know what caused the brain damage? Was it the birth?

Oh that's so horrible.

Riven, sorry to hear of your experience. It is hard to comprehend.

riven, find out if your hospital has either or both of the following:

a maternity services liasion committee

and a labour ward forum

you can go to either of these as a user rep and get your issues out there

PALS should be able to help you find out or the supervisor of midwives

if tehre is an MSLC, find out who the chair is and get their contact details, and they can get you into the meting

'How is it 'judgy' to talk about the risks of c-section?'

It's judgey because you are NOT just talking about the risks of c-section.

You are saying that, in particular, pregnant women should not be allowed a choice in the way in which they chose to give birth.

And the chief proponent of your argument is the cost.

Well, by that standard, then the NHS, which is at the breaking point in many areas, should not fund any procedure that is 'not strictly medically necessary'. By your standard.

So there goes things like mole removal for moles that blight a child's face, breast reconstruction after mastectomy, sterilisation, and on and on.

Flawed thinking.

And no, I have never had a csection.