42% of UK births are c-sections

[searchinghere]

Is anyone else surprised at this statistic? I’m sure it was only something like 20% when my now-teen was born.

Although I had noticed how so many of my friends/family members/colleagues having babies recently all seem to have had cesareans.

It looks as though the shift will only continue so potentially c-section will exceed 50% of births and be the more common mode of birth in a few years.

I think it’s really interesting! Will there be drive to try and push numbers down and increase vaginal births again? Or will it eventually become standard for most women to just book in for an elective section as standard and ‘attempting natural’ will be seen as a more unusual choice like home birth is currently.

It's widely known that babies are being born heavier with larger heads whereas womens pelvises are becoming smaller...with obvious and increasing consequences.

@Iimetree No. It shouldn't be anywhere near that high.

Should it not? Why is that?

Yes I have seen the latest figures for the past year which shows it’s now 45% of births, so nearly half of births now. Will be really interesting what the figure is in five or ten years.

As mentioned by PP, hospitals class lots of c sections as “emergency” that aren’t really what you might be imagining as an emergency. My c section was an emergency but it was actually maternal request as I didn’t want to continue with the induction. So the stats might paint an unrealistic picture when really it’s just that “unplanned” is tagged as “emergency” - but the woman herself could have had the plan that she would request a c section if labour went on too long or they suggested forceps etc.

I choose one due to a previous shoulder dystocia. I would choose one again if I have another.

Then there’s the fact that electives aren’t really ‘elective’

After my emergency section with my first I was strongly encouraged to have elective sections with future pregnancies as it was expected I’d have the same complications and end up with an emergency anyway.

I chose to have a further 3 c sections but it didn’t really feel like a choice and I wish it’d been different.

Elective also includes cs that have been recommended by medics, it just means booked in advance rarther than an emergency.
So a whole host of women for very good reasons, who perhaps in different circumstances would choose a natural birth. People can be very judgemental but don't know the facts.

Exactly! Elective can be because of:
Breech
Placenta problems (like placenta previa)
Previous uterine surgery
Previous pelvic surgery
Medical issues in mum
Previous caesarean sections

Not just the fake "I'd really like to have the baby on Tuesday at 10 am" elective section narrative

Scrub nurse here. My trust has a 53% c-section rate for 2025! Maternal requests main reason.

I’m amazed it’s not higher than 45% tbh. Agree with PP, elective cs just seems like a complete no-brainer to me. Why wouldn’t more women be offered / choose to have it? There’s enough uncertainty with pregnancy, why wouldn’t you want to take some uncertainty away by scheduling the birth?

Perhaps we’re just in the transition period and people are still getting used to the idea. In 5-10 years’ time, when the majority of births will be c-section (one hopes), it will become a very ordinary thing and not something one would opine on on a parenting forum.

As someone who has seen so many older women with prolapsed uterus ( that is their uterus literally hanging out of their vaginas) thIs is great news. The nhs has never really taken account of the full long term cost and health issues caused by vaginal births. It great women have fought back to make their own choices. I deeply regret my vaginal birth ( with third degree tear) and went on to have two sections. I wish had had the confidence to ask for a planned section for my first. Sounds like women are putting themselves first now.

Improvements in fertility treatment and maternity care in the last half century or so mean that there's loads more adults around who would never have been conceived, or would not have survived birth otherwise.

Presumably many of them are carrying the genetic traits that required their mother to have extra medical care, and will now need it themselves.

Not widely known really, but yes it's happening. Most likely because women with smaller pelvises are not being reduced by natural selection any more.

There seems to be a lot of emphasis on the positive outcomes of CS for women on this thread (although ignoring the many benefits of natural birth for women) and frighteningly little about the negative outcomes for babies.

Also some maternity services are very pro natural birth(actually not natural) with inductions and interventions seen as normal, then leaving women and babies in dangerous situations requiring an emergency cs. The women are then understandably traumatised/medically compromised in some way, leading to an elective cs in their next pregnancy.
No point in denying our maternity services are at best stretched at worst not fit for purpose. Read the reliable papers,watch news, look at recent investigations.
Compared to many years ago we as women are opting for hospital births, getting regular care in pregnancy and are better informed, maternal deaths are vastly reduced as are negative outcomes for our babies, but there are still big improvements to be made. A cs costs££ that is a big reason they are not routine, yes a cs can compromise the baby but££ is the root of all.

@Crushed23 Because a vaginal birth is usually the safest option for borh mother and baby? No way would I opt for a C-Section unless medically advised and necessary. Three vaginal births here - the best (and safest) one of these being at home.
The increase is concerning.

I agree with you, seen the after effects decades down the line when women healed well from vaginal births and its part of the reason I pushed so hard for a section and im so glad I did.

The increase is not concerning at all. Like I say, we’re just in a transition period and soon the vast majority of births will be c-section. Women will still be able to choose vaginal births, of course, just as some choose home births now. I’m not yet pregnant but I already know I will definitely be choosing a c-section - it’s a complete no-brainer to me and everyone in my social circle.

Medical advances which makes women’s lives easier and increase women’s choice, especially as they relate to fertility/motherhood - IVF, egg freezing, formula milk, abortion pills, etc. are always denigrated. Availability of c-section and the option to avoid the excruciating pain of labour should be celebrated.

You don’t know what labour feels like - it’s not excruciating for all women. In fact many of the medical advances like induction make it worse actually from a pain perspective. And with respect, if you haven’t had a baby yet, you can’t know what it’s like to have to recover from major abdominal surgery while also caring for an infant. It’s no walk in the park. There are also risks with c sections and for future pregnancies, and it can make some
things post partum like bonding and breastfeeding harder for some women.

No one said a c-section was a walk in the park, but more and more women are choosing to have one for various reasons. I think it’s fantastic that there’s more of a choice now. I don’t care that some tiny minority of women didn’t find vaginal delivery painful, and a small proportion didn’t tear and need stitches, I won’t be taking that risk.

There are plenty of risks with vaginal births too. It should be up to the woman to weigh up the pros and cons and decide which birth she wants, choice is never a bad thing when it comes to a woman's body.

For what it's worth, I had a vaginal birth the first time and then requested a c-section the second time because I was having twins and I wish I had opted for a c-section with my first pregnancy too as it was such a great experience.

I agree with you i choose 2 sections for no medical reason and have 0 regrets. Out of all my friends and women I've met at baby groups the vast majority are struggling with their births, the feeling of being in pain, without support, no control over their bodies etc I dont know why anyone would want that.
My sections and recoveries were a walk in the park in comparison and I recovered quickly. I had 2 under 2 and husband was back at work less than 2weeks after.

@Crushed23 With respect, you haven't even had a baby yet, you're not even pregnant. Yes delivering naturally isn't a walk in the park but I've done it three times. It was the safest method of delivery for my babies and worth the discomfort.
You are incredibly naive to think a C-Section is the "painless risk-free process" that you clearly believe it to be.
Perhaps do some research and then get back to me.
Just a quick Google:
For most low-risk pregnancies, a spontaneous vaginal delivery is considered the safest and best method, offering faster recovery and lower infection rates.
Having said that, I would not choose an NHS birth of any nature in the UK currently.