Natural - v - Caesarean - a new thread

[JoolsToo]

sorry to be bossy but can we carry on here?

I'm for natural when possible

I think anyone who was treated with dignity and well cared for and delivered of a healthy baby has been fortunate, whichever way it ended up or they chose, let's not forget that for most women in the world childbirth doesn't offet any choices and is the single most dangerous thing they will ever have to go through

Let's just all count ourselves lucku

cooperoo - first let me apologise I read your name as 'copperpoo!'

It's intersting you mention that about SA and CS's. My SIL came to our wedding 3 weeks after the birth of our son, was dancing around, carrying stuff, organising people and generally being very active.............I later disocvered she'd had a CS - and I've heard of other people that have had CS's in SA and recovered really really quickly too.........maybe they've discovered something that we don't know about (well they did perform the first heart transplant!)

toothache - when I went in for my second section - the surgeon was reading my notes and obviously saw the comment re my desire for a vbac ( didn't happen but c'est la vie) and instructed me that no3 would have to be a ceasar no matter what as that was the protocol of the hospital where I had dd2. I was also told how the unterine wall becomes weaker with each c-section ( can't remember who asked about that..)

I have had 2 sections. The first one saved dd1 - she would have died without it... despite my desire for a vb. No1 was rushed straight to intensive care - how she was born was the last of my worries.... it paled into insignificance when faced with my baby having 2 open heart surgeries at 8 weeks old.......

Second time round I wanted a vbac ( simply as it would ..i thought.. be easier recovery with a toddler with sn who is not walking etc) and for a number of reasons ended up with an elective caesar. I have no regrets and do not feel like I missed out on anything. It used to amaze me how much time was spent in antenatal class focusing on labour when it was the rest of the baby's life that concerned me..... one day or so compared with a lifetime of decisions and situations to face.

This is what worked for me and was my choice - definitely not what I would recommend for everyone. I believe it really is a personal choice and for me - having two babies born without stress and drama was more important than how they got there. The fact that I had them to take home was all that mattered.

After my 1st section I was sharing a room with another girl who'd had a section. While I could barely crawl out of bed, she was practically dancing around the room. The difference? She'd had one of the top surgeons at the hospital. Two years later we both gave birth again. Both tried for vaginal delivery. She had a natural delivery and all went well. My uterine scar ruptured and I had to have an emergency section again. When i had DS3 I made sure i got the surgeon she'd had and he did an excellent job. But I had to pay for the privilege and not everyone would have that choice

Without reading any of the posts, and deciding that I want to put my little bit in the mix...

I have had 1 emergency section, 1 ventouse delivery, 1 straightforward (can't believe I did it) delivery and 1 elective section.

Personally I preferred the vaginal deliveries. The ventouse was because the cord was around DD1's neck twice, the emergency section because DS1 went into distress, the straightforward vaginal because my midwife was brilliant and I trusted her completely (maybe that's why, maybe not) and the elective because the DTs were transverse. I was on course for a vaginal delivery but the little darlings were turning too much (how they found the room I'll never know).

My recovery time was so much quicker with the vaginal deliveries. With the first section I lost over 2 litres of blood, with the first vaginal DD1 needed a blood transfusion. With the next two births everything was straightforward. There are risks with every delivery. We hear all the time of women who have died giving birth. I don't personally believe that any one is safer than the other. But for the grace of God is how I have felt each time I have heard about a woman or baby dying. It is a major event however it unfolds and for the majority of us it is a happy event that results in healthy babies and healthy mums. For others it is a whole other story. I don't think that there needs to be a this or that way debate. I think that we need to find ways to bring healthy live babies into the world that don't cost the lives of their mothers.

That's me done!

You're right Suzy of course, that is a salutary reminder, but as it happens, I think there were questions over my quality of care in both c-sections. Chipmonkey has raised the issue of surgeon competence - the man who did my first section was sacked from the hospital, it transpired. He was your archetypal "treat the patient like a piece of meat" surgeon pig, actually.
The second surgeon was highly rated by all the M/Ws I dealt with and was a kind and approachable man. My clostridium infection was misdiagnosed at first though (not by him) and I was treated with drugs which apparently gave the bacteria the equivalent of a three-course dinner with wine and made me much worse.

aha just found a page wtih the 'risk of dying' after CS and VB

Less than 1 in 2500 women will die after a CS
Less than 1 in 10,000 women die after a VB

That's just from one website - I guess other sites will probably come up with different figures

I'm for natural where possible and I truly believe that doctors recommend c-sections as it is easier for them. I can't believe how many of my friends and family who have babies in the last couple of years have ended up with a c-section. When I was pg with dd1 c-sections really were for emergencies only, now it seems they are almost as common as vaginal births.

A close friend of mine was really put off having a vaginal delivery after reading a thread on mumsnet about broken pelvises etc. She ended up having a c-section. Still, she is happy and has a beautiful baby.

Gwenick you said that you are in a position to comment because you've had both

well no, I would dispute that .. what are you commenting on after all? other people's birth choices?? and where is your expertise 2 or possibly 3 births. I know and you know that every single birth is different, there is no great experience there

my first birth was totally different from my 2nd, and probably totally different again from any of yours

sorry about that marina, didn't mean to be giving a lecture
I guess it's just that I had one nice and one awful emergency c sections and I just want to forget about the whole business and move on, I'm probably on the wrong thread then

It's always good to ask the MWs who they would go to if they were pg. I found out afterwards that all the MW's at my hopital ask for the guy who delivered DS3

actually I had a horrendous vaginal birth (transverse ear presenting, high forceps and ventouse) with dd1 and I think I probably would have been better off with a c-section - well, dd1 would have as she was born horribly bruised and swollen .

But I find hospitals/medical procedures very traumatic and I HATE feeling like a victim so would avoid an operation unless it was absolutely necessary - would feel violated by a c-section I am sure.

sorry to hear that enid, I agree with marina though, it really does depend on the medical team and the surgeon

"I truly believe that doctors recommend c-sections as it is easier for them.2

How is it easier for them? If they recommend c/s they have to do them. If they recommend vb the MW generally have to do them.

I had a natural birth with dd & really hope to have one this time too.I was terrified I'd need a cs when dd was transverse.One of the reasons was because I hate hospitals anyway & the more important reason for me,was that I had read at the time,that women who have had a cs can find it harder to concieve 2nd time around.

We had dd after many years of infertility & there was no way I wanted to risk any future fertility,especially as I'd already had 2 abdomnial ops in the preceding 12 months.The thought of any more interference or scarring really worried me.

However,if I had needed a cs for the safety of myself or the baby,I wouldn't have hesitated at all.An what anyone else choses to do is entirely up to them-none of my business.

Cristina, if you are an obstetrician, you are responsible for the VB whether or not you are involved or not...every woman giving birth has a named consultant for her delivery even if she never needs to meet them. So if there is an element of risk in VB identified by a m/w, and you are referred to the consultant, they might take the view it is safer to opt for an elective. Which they often don't do either - they farm it out to surgical regs or their own regs.

Why on earth are some women so very keen to restrict other women's choices? What difference does it make to YOU if I have a section? I'm not saying you shouldn't have the kind of birth you prefer, so why are some of you so keen to take away choices? I don't say, well, you shouldn't have a home birth or a waterbirth or an active birth or any other kind of birth... I think it's up to you and good luck to you. Your body, your baby, your choice. Why on earth do you not extend the same courtesy to others? I don't get it, I really don't. Personally, I have a bit of difficulty understanding why anyone wouldn't have a section - painless, quick, I had wonderful intelligent, caring, professionals around me (instead of the nasty midwife who told me my labour was 'just backache' and was so dismissive and unpleasant) no horrible, horrible labour (I personally found the pain and uncontrollable nature of labour a very upsetting and traumatic experience that left me unable to sleep without having panic attacks at first - very scary. My labour free section left me absolutely elated by contrast). I was out of hospital after two days, am pain-free, active and well after two weeks (was on paracetamol for a few days after the birth, but now don't need anything at all) and I don't feel I missed out on anything. But I'm not saying you have to do it the way I did, so why can't we respect other women's choices? Why is there a moral hierarchy of birth with vaginal birth with no pain relief at the top and c-sections at the bottom? I can't believe women do this to each other, and it makes me sad, frankly.

I understand how it works but then the key aspect here is that the O&G would need to genuinely believe that a c/s is safer than the vb. So they don't just offer it willy-nilly.

Sorry, my previous post was in answer to Marina's. Things move so quickly on here.

Whichever is safer for mother and baby...who decides though?

"Why is there a moral hierarchy of birth with vaginal birth with no pain relief at the top and c-sections at the bottom? I can't believe women do this to each other, and it makes me sad, frankly."

No answers, Aloha, but I second your question and exasperation.

This thread is really interesting (and polite, marvellous!). I do think the way childbirth evolves is interesting. It wasn't so long ago that women gave birth with legs in stirrups and enemas and shaving were routine. I'm glad we've moved on from that and I think ongoing discussion and debate about childbirth, methods and treatment of women surrounding childbirth are valid. I agree Suzy, it is only a small part of a child's life but I don't think discussions about childbirth are worth dismissing because of that.

but Alhoa - IMO a CS is VERY essential if mother or baby is at risk of dying - but if people OPT for CS for no medical reason they're increasing the risk of dying by 4!!

Sorry, I see Cristina. I've always felt pretty confident in my consultant's advice and I tend to believe most doctors do choose what they believe to best for mother and baby, not what's convenient for them.