Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Childbirth

Share experiences and get support around labour, birth and recovery.

Natural - v - Caesarean - a new thread

457 replies

JoolsToo · 25/02/2005 10:29

sorry to be bossy but can we carry on here?

I'm for natural when possible

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
WideWebWitch · 25/02/2005 23:08

Sorry, didn't mean to post twice and am going to bed now!

hercules · 25/02/2005 23:09

I do feel a bit that those who opted for sections are more critical to those who didnt than the other way round. If I posted the same things about sections I'd be slated.

serenequeen · 25/02/2005 23:09

www, yes i am - worried about 23% c sections, that is. agree that "choices" will be governed by how the medical professionals present the risks. hate to see css written off as low risk/easy etc. it's a major operation fhs! but then it happens exclusively to women...

i'm not in any way referring to medically necessary css e.g. for placenta previa. but i think "failure to progress" has a lot to answer for...

serenequeen · 25/02/2005 23:09

www, yes i am - worried about 23% c sections, that is. agree that "choices" will be governed by how the medical professionals present the risks. hate to see css written off as low risk/easy etc. it's a major operation fhs! but then it happens exclusively to women...

i'm not in any way referring to medically necessary css e.g. for placenta previa. but i think "failure to progress" has a lot to answer for...

Smurfs · 25/02/2005 23:19

kaansmum - here, here. Am fortunate that consultant with DS was willing to listen and progressive in her views and that it is about individual choice. Refreshing to see there are people out there who also have no desire to go through a vaginal delivery - it gets lonely in the 'elective section through choice' camp especially at NCT coffee mornings!!

Cristina7 · 25/02/2005 23:34

"It's based on what loads of experts thought at a conference, scroll down to the AIMs report. "

The only reference I find to this 10% desirable rate for CSs is from a WHO conference in 1985. I'm just curious to know how such targets are set for the UK but can't find the data on this.

highlander · 25/02/2005 23:44

LOL smurfs - have a vision of you sitting in the corner with the 'must do better' hat on

highlander · 25/02/2005 23:46

the CS rate in my hospital was 50%. Thank God, I thought; they know what they're doing

Cristina7 · 25/02/2005 23:54

Hercules, you say "I do feel a bit that those who opted for sections are more critical to those who didnt than the other way round. If I posted the same things about sections I'd be slated."

I think this has been a very friendly discussion and specifically about not criticising people for their choices. One of its many sub-threads has been exactly the moral aspect of it all and whether there should be a moral hierarchy in how giving birth is perceived.

On a lighter note, can you imagine walking up to someone and telling them "my choice in a husband has been so much better than yours"? Most aspects of life are off-limits and private and we don't criticise out loudly, but when it comes to childbirth and parenting there are so few rules.

JoolsToo · 26/02/2005 00:02

C7 - its so nice that its stayed friendly - I'm really pleased about that!

OP posts:
kaansmum · 26/02/2005 00:44

Lol Smurfs and Highlander . I've got reasonably flat nipples too so could never bf effectively - I'm sure I'd have been doubly unwelcome at a NCT coffee morning - I've no doubt nipple shields are for wimps too!!

Hercules, you should not worry about making comments which are openly critical of women who are quite willing to admit that cs would be their birthing method of choice, or opt for delivery by elective cs - others have been doing this in a highly offensive, scathing and judgemental way for years.

In my opinion it's precisely because those of us who do not consider there is any shame in admitting that, given the choice, we'd opt for an elective cs, have been slated for so long for being selfish, vain scaredycats who do not possess the moral fibre to "do what women are made to do" that we have had to let our voices be heard and defend our right to hold the views we do.

The same people who have slated us for so long are the same people who peddle the sort of nonsense that makes women who have emergency css feel like they've "failed" in some way. In my view it is highly likely that this is the sort of rubbish which gives rise to the link between cs and PND rather than factors arising from the cs experience itself.

Delivering a baby by elective cs does not make a woman any less of a woman or less of a mother.

As mothers let us be judged on how we nuture, care for and teach our children as they mature to adulthood. The day he/she is born is just one day out of your child's life - does it really matter how they come into the world as long as the outcome is a healthy child and a happy, healthy mother.

kaansmum · 26/02/2005 00:53

Another point I wanted to make is that a natural labour and delivery can be equally gory and traumatic as the major abdominal surgery which a cs entails. Recoveries from vaginal births can be lengthy and fraught with problems too. I'm sure there must be a far higher rate of readmissions to hospital to restich bodged episiotomies than to attend to cs scars too.

highlander · 26/02/2005 01:33

the real down side to a CS, IMO, is that you can't bounce around on a bouncy ball thing (been reading the active labour thread!). Mind you, I suppose you could always bounce down to theatre on a space hopper

suzywong · 26/02/2005 01:39

well I bounced around on the ball thing for hours before being whisked in to the theatre for 2 em Cs both times, it was very comfortable for me but didn't shift OP ds1 or stubborn ds2

Amanda3266 · 26/02/2005 09:23

Good discussion this one. As I said previously, I would have liked a nice, "normal" birth without intervention. Unfortunately that's not the way it was BUT I don't regret one moment of it. The staff made my inevitable section as special as they could. I don't feel I failed in any way because the "normal" way did not happen. I hate the idea that anyone should be made to feel that way just because they opted for a caesarean section. This is 2005 - we are more aware than ever of the risks and benefits of both options. At the end of the day you give birth - and a nice planned caesarean section is just as valid as a vaginal birth - each to their own. In an ideal world I wouldn't choose a caesarean (the risk of dying as a result, albeit low, is still double that of a vaginal birth). However, I also know that there are long term health problems associated with vaginal birth which has been mismanaged - is it any wonder when hearing the dreadful stories from other women (and there are plenty of them out there) that some of us say "No thank you - I'll have a CS"
Anyway - not putting this all very well. Basically - we should be able to go with whatever option feels the right one AND should not be made to feel guilty about whatever choice we make. We all give birth - but in different ways - each is valid.

Uwila · 26/02/2005 09:48

I don't understand where these statistics and guidelines come from, who sets them, and why they they should govern my medical desires. These are a genuine questions. Who makes up WHO? And what are the factors that contribute to the recommendations they make? Is it acceptable for me to be a statistic in a government initative to have x number of any kind of surgeries. I once had surgery on my knee and no one talked about someone else'd statistics on what I should or shouldn't do. I have several consultation with the surgeon. He gave me the facts as well as his personal opinion. We gave rehab/physio a try for a couple of months, and then I opted for surgery. This was a choice made between the surgeon and me. Why does anyone else need to be involved when it comes to caesareans.

NotQuiteCockney · 26/02/2005 10:00

Um, kaansmum, the drugs used in an epidural are (from what I know) much stronger than gas + air, or pethedine. They're still narcotics.

Granted, from what I know, with a routine section, the drugs don't have time to get through to the baby, as s/he is gotten out so soon after the epidural is administered. But an epidural in labour certainly affects the baby.

Ameriscot2005 · 26/02/2005 10:08

I thought that the target C-section rate was getting up towards 15%. The long-term rate was 7%, but with safer anaesthetics nowadays, more women fall into the camp where CS is less risky than vaginal birth.

The target rate isn't going to be the same in all countries. While 10% might be the target rate in the developing world, it's reasonable for it to be higher in the the UK where there is universal access to obstetric resources.

Haven't read all the messages on this thread, but it's important to distinguish between a public health point of view to say that vaginal birth is better for the population as a whole, and the decision-making process that go on in individual cases. Any pregnancy could be in that deserved 15% requiring CS...

Ameriscot2005 · 26/02/2005 10:10

Uwila, WHO deals in epidemiological statistics - it doesn't concern itself with you (or anyone else) as an individual.

PuffTheMagicDragon · 26/02/2005 10:18

Highlander, rofl laughing at the thought of bouncing down to theatre on a spacehopper - why didn't I think of that when I had my two. I had my own birthing ball (fat lot of good it did me) - I could have attached some ears to it and boinged off!

aloha · 26/02/2005 10:36

www - nobody disagrees that it is a shame when women who DON'T want a section end up having one due to inadequate care. I have posted the same on this very thread. But on these threads there is always an element of attacking women who DO want a section - a teeny weeny 7% of women who have sections.
Comments like, 'I don't beleive we should be given a choice' make my blood boil, frankly. What business is it of anyone else what choice I make? BTW the 'we' here obviously means 'they' in this context.
I'm all for home birth, waterbirth, active birth....but not for me. And after my horrible experience I can safely say that I found labour an appalling experience, and my cs a good one.
Can you imagine an office with the following conversation happening:
Woman 1: "It was a struggle getting in today"
Woman 2: "But you didn't get in properly, you came on the bus. I walked in, without a coat on. You took the easy way out. What are you? Too posh to walk?"
Woman 3: "Yes, and I don't think people should be allowed the choice of coming by bus. After all, statistics show that people who walk to work live longer than people who come by bus. Anyway, I don't see why people make such a fuss. It only takes me ten minutes to walk in and it doesn't bother me."
Woman 4 (sobbing, looks a bit like Kate Winslet): "I feel like such a failure. I live 30 miles away, and it was such a long walk, and I was so tired and my feet hurt, and I tried and tried to walk in but then I couldn't take any more so I just hopped on a bus for the last bit and now I don't feel like a real woman."

ScummyMummy · 26/02/2005 10:43

That's some water cooler conversation, aloha. I always feel I should have an opinion on this since it's one of those perennial hot topics but I don't see what the problem is with everyone doing what they want without interference if it's medically safe.

WideWebWitch · 26/02/2005 10:47

Ameriscot, I don't agree when you say "While 10% might be the target rate in the developing world, it's reasonable for it to be higher in the the UK where there is universal access to obstetric resources. " Why is that reasonable? And people keep saying c section is as safe as vb, I'm sure it's not. Just because people think it is and keep saying it is doesn't make it true.

Willow2 · 26/02/2005 10:49

If there wasn't such bloody pressure to have a "natural" birth the medical profession wouldn't feel obliged to encourage women who are failing to progress to hang on for days. Ergo there wouldn't be so many difficult deliveries that leave mum and baby xxxxxx up.

Seriously, this is ridiculous. Does it matter how a baby is born if mum and baby are happy at the end of it?

aloha · 26/02/2005 10:52

Quite a few obstetricians agree that term c-sections are as safe or even possibly safer for babies, and if the section is a modern elective one with no other complications and local anaesthetic, then it is as safe for the mother too. C-sections vary hugely - a section for soaring blood pressure or complete placeta praevia with bleeding is of course much more risky than an uncomplicated vb.
And anyway, why does it bother anyone else if I choose to have a procedure that is - statistically - marginally more risky than the one you choose? Again, for me this isn't about lack of care in the NHS (which I agree is a huge problem, whatever kind of birth you want), this is about the specific issue of choice.