Natural - v - Caesarean - a new thread

[JoolsToo]

sorry to be bossy but can we carry on here?

I'm for natural when possible

One of the reasons I prefer homebirth

Uwila, I've just looked at the NICE guidelines and there is a big Adobe document which I've just skimmed over and can't paste because it's too enormous but it explains the risks of cs vs vb.

What I think is weird about the whole CS/VB debate, is that somehow you can't be supportive of both methods.

CS has its place, VB has its place. Let's embrace both and be thankful that we live in an era where we have the option of CS, but let's not fool ourselves that CS is always superior. It's only superior in a relative small number of births.

My last baby was breech. My first choice of birth method was a completely hands-off birth, which fortunately worked (she basically fell out ). My second option was to go straight to C. I was not one for messing about with large episiotomies, piper forceps, or any other medical paraphenalia for the sake of a vaginal birth.

actually in my 2nd section the junior surgeon did say "oops" .. thank god they sedate you so I didn't react badly

no problams ensued though .. inless I can blame the gastritis on that 'oops'

The RCOG agree that the high c section rate in the UK is a matter for concern, as do the NCT , the Royal College of Midwives , AIMS and the WHO.

When I was discussing my 2nd section with my obs at Kings College I asked him if he was worried about the percentage of sections

he said they got so many difficult cases at Kings that it was ridiculous to get caught up in the numbers and they could go hang for all he cared

I'm still not really convinced of any risks that outweight the risks of repeating my last experience. And I say this very much from the point of view of the baby's health and not my own discomfort.

I can see that big organisations of impressive numbers of people have gotten together and realeased statements on their collective views. But I have not been convinced of the reasons behind these views. I see it as a bit like my NHS GP trying to tell me why my children should have the MMR (not convinced that that is their choice either). I guess I need to be convinced of the reasons. So far, I haven't been.

Uwila, I'm a bit alarmed that you didn't know that damage to the bladder was a known complication from sections! I thought they had to warn you about that in the consent - maybe because your last one was a crash?

At any rate, when they have a section - they cut through skin, then through muscle, then they
fold the bladder out (which is why the catheter is there - folding out a full bladder would be harder), then they cut into the uterus. Sometimes the bladder gets nicked. It's not common, but it does happen.

Amanda3266 - Just wanted to say very much appreciated what you put in your post esp with your point of view as a professional.

Sometimes the bladder gets nicked

Bloody hell, that must be quite rare? It's not like they are going in with a lawnmower. You'd think they should be able to just slice open the ONE organ?

Organs such as bladders and bowels can be damged as a result instrumental vaginal deliveries too..

It's worth also pointing out the potential risks to the health of babies reprsented by instrumental deliveries. Babies delivered by forceps and vacuum are often traumatised by the birth and do not feed or settle well for months afterwards.

Perhaps it could be argued that the pressure to "hang on for a natural birth" in labour could mean more protracted labours and traumatic instrumental vaginal deliveries. I'm sure all would agree that a mismanaged instrumental vaginal delivery can be potentially far more dangerous to mother and baby than a cs.

Oooh a found another FACT!!!

Bladder injury rate for caesarian births: 0.28%

January 2005 Study here .

Message withdrawn

So many births are "traumatic" because we tinker with the labour process before it's ready to begin.

Many women who undergo induction of labour end up with rather a lot of intervention that you don't normally see in spontaneous labours.

You have to look at the whole picture, not the little snippets.

Prunegirl, did you find that it was hard to talk about your great birth experience?

I found that with mine - all good or great - that it was just not on to mention it in coffee mornings or similar gatherings of new mums. You are only allowed to talk about trauma.

I agree with you in that I don't talk about my labours and births much, but I am aware that I was lucky.

I don't think many people DO talk about their births actually. In all honesty, I never mention mine if there are pregnant women in the room.

I am aware I had a really good experience even though I had no pain relief at all.Mind you I must admit I struggled with the labour,VV quick,was begging for an epidural or anything to ta the edge of contractions!!!!In the end I was too far on for anything but had a very easy 2nd stage.I ended up having to have a spinal to manually remove placenta,very unlady like but who cares.In the end it is what is safest for you and your baby as long as you're both fine at the end of the day regardless of birth plans and idealisms!!!!

Lockets, WHY does it horrify you that other people don't want the same sort of birth as you? It doesn't bother me.
WWW, I'm afraid that it isn't as easy as you might think to get a section out of choice. It can involve a lot of exhausting arguing of your case, even if you have been severely traumatised by a previous birth experience. And nobody gets away without a lecture about risks - which I really don't think happens to people who want a vaginal birth - ie the risk of severe tearing leading to permanent incontinence problems. All birth is 'risky' in that it is not risk free - pregnancy isn't risk free either. We gamble with our futures by choosing to have children. I did my research. I was even reasonably convinced by Michel Odent's idea that it could be better to have a section after going into labour - until I did, and discovered that you got no care at all, and could basically die of a bloody scar rupture for all the midwives at Kings cared. I was bleeding, in agony, very distressed, and was totally ignored. I really wouldn't recommend that path to anyone now. And I DO NOT believe that it only hurt because I wasn't 'relaxed' enough. I think it's quite hard to relax when you are in agony.

aloha - I think maybe you get all the 'risks' told you for a c/s in the same way that the risks are outlined for any invasive surgery?

Aloha - your experience sounds awful . I had a section with ds1 as a result of a failed induction when he was 2 weeks overdue. With ds2 the consultant offered me the choice of a section straight away. Then we agreed to go for a trial of labour and section if things didn't progress.

As it happens ds2 went overdue and the consultant examined me, said that the baby hadn't even become fully engaged and showed no signs of wanting to come out, so he'd book me in for a section the following day.

All very civilised.

Aloha, I'm glad people have the risks of c section explained to them - quite right too. I'm sorry you had an awful time.

Message withdrawn