caesarians options

[woodstock2]

dear all
i am considering all the birth options and am keen to have an elective caesarian, I have not looked in to his much, I live in the Bristol area and just don;t knwo where to start, I don't see my midwife for a few more weeks, so wonder what research I can do in the meantime. Are private hospitals the first port of call?

you have the right to a Caesarian on the NHS but unless there is a clinical reason why you'lld need one anyway, you'll really to have to push for this. there's risks to C-Sections as well as vaginal births(as with any operation) so best to be as informed as possible.

Why do you want a CS, woodstock? Is this your 1st baby or have you previously had a baby?

i assume you do realise that a c/s has many more risks associated with it than a vaginal birth?

www.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?o=91520

link to the NHS guidance

HI - would also say look at the NICE guidelines. I have just made the decision myself whether to go for VBAC or planned and decided to go for the latter. On looking at the guidelines I am not so sure Bundles view is totally accurate!

rydercup, it's not a view. a c/s is surgery and has all the risks associated with that and the decision to have a c/s (i have had 2) should be taken in conjunction with a medical professional.

woodstock, have alook at the Health, Caesarean scar thread below!

"A vaginal birth is overall four times safer for a woman than having a Caesarean (although an elective Caesarean is thought to be slightly safer than an emergency Caesarean) "

from here

Woodstock - You have the right to a selective c-section on the NHS - you might need to be bolshy but it depends on how sympathetic your consultant is, some are very amendable and some are not. Good luck with your birth. xx

I too am planning an elective caesarean (end of May). I think the risks are low. And I think risks of vaginal birth are often brushed over due to pressure to reduce caesareans. At the end of the day, it is your body, your baby, and (I believe) YOU should choose which you prefer. You should probably ask your midwife for a referral to the obstetrician AS EARLLY AS POSSIBLE. My hospital (Queen Charlotte) prefers that I try VBAC, but they have admitted (relubtantly) that if I insist, at 36 weeks they will book my in for a caesarean at 39 weeks.

So, if you want a caesarean, start demanding sooner rather than later. Put your preferences in your notes, copy them, and let the hospital know you have a copy...

It very much depends on who you talk to as to how hard it is to get a caesarian just because you want one, but, yes, you should get one on the NHS, and it is not ethical to refuse you your choice. It is a very, very safe operation these days though of course, like pregnancy and any kind of birth, it has risks attached. I've had two (for different reasons) and think they are wonderful, but other people don't have such a good experience. The risks include post-op infections, increased (though still very tiny) risk of excessive bleeding, and, if you were to go for a natural birth for a subsequent pregnancy, scar rupture. Also if you want six kids I wouldn't recommend a section as it does become riskier if you have repeated sections (though of course Posh has had three now and is fine). Why do you want one?

There is a school of thought that thinks that the hormones released in labour and the birth process are important primers for infant development. I'm not entirely convinced, but it might be something you want to look into. The obstetrician Michel Odent is a great believer in this. And if you do get an caesarian I think you eliminate the risks of breathing difficulties by waiting as long as possible - until 39 weeks - though that presents the risk of going into labour.

the link i posted has the associated risks for both mother & baby on there, including breathing problems...but as you know aloha, you can end up going into labour anyway

Hello again - Bundle - I looked at the guidelines and was surprised at the risk in relation to vaginal birth - particularly as you rightly point out if it is planned vs emergency.Plus, I am not sure that Woodstock was 'asking for an opinion' or risk factors etc at this stage - she was merely asking where she should go for research!!!!!!!

Just to add - the other useful thing about the NICE Guidelines is that they pool all the evidence and data that exist together to paint a whole picture (which in my opinion - not that I feel we should be giving them in this case - don't make C-section appear as scary as is thought)

Just to add - the other useful thing about the NICE Guidelines is that they pool all the evidence and data that exist together to paint a whole picture (which in my opinion - not that I feel we should be giving them in this case - don't make C-section appear as scary as is thought)

research includes assessing the risks imo rydercup. i have had 2 c/s but if things had worked out differently i would have opted for less intervention, had it not been needed for medical reasons. i think the risks (however small because as aloha points out it's a v safe op these days) are often pushed aside with stories of "too posh to push" mums etc in certain areas of the press.

Listen - I am going to bow out of this thread - the debate could go on and on and really this is Woodstocks thread (there are masses of other threads re the C-section vs vaginal birth debate!). Woodstock - I hope you get information that you want. What worked in support of my case was using the NICE guidelines it is a language that medical professionals and hospitals use -infact whilst I waited for my appointment a summarised version of them was on the wall at the hospital. Good luck.

Dd was born at 39 plus five in an elective c-section and had breathing difficulties which required a stay in SCBU and oxygen for a short time. Going to term doesn't totally remove the risk of this c-section related problem, although obviously it reduces it with every passing day.
I agree with bundle on this. I think the risks associated with electives are not adequately publicised. I have two lovely children to show for my electives (one absolutely essential, one advised) and have also experienced wound rupture (that really was scary), wound infection, dd being carted off to SCBU and a monstrous clostridium difficile infection probably triggered by the large amount of broad-spectrum antibiotics shoved into my drip post-op.
None of these were connected in any way with the reasons for my electives and none could have been predicted from my general level of health (good). I felt a pyrrhic victory as I lay in bed and my consulant said ruefully from a safe distance "you're right Marina, you and c-sections really don't get on ". He wouldn't sit down anywhere near me because I still had the squits...

rydercup this is not a debate

making a decision about anything like this involved informed consent, and i was trying to help with the request to become informed.

marina

and yes, there are totally unpredictable things that can happen in a c/s (like poor old marina) and vaginal birth alike

DD was born at 42 +2 by emergency c-section and we never were able to produce much milk. Gave up after about a mont. So I don't think I subscribe to that hormone production theory.

But, Woodstock, I agree with Aloha's point that if you want lots more children, c-section might not be a great idea (if there is no other medical reason for it).

As far as the baby is concerned, the risks of breathing difficulties do decrease dramatically - from over four per cent to under two per cent - if you hang on till 39 weeks. Although you obviously wouldn't want to be that one in 50. And you might go into labour.

Risks to you, I don't know the stats but as it's an op it does have risks. As does vaginal birth, obviously. And it does also mean that any subsequent labour is a first labour.

uwila - I had an emergency cs with DD at 42 weeks, after 2 days of a failed induction. I suffered the same issue wth low milk production. I never has leaking issues; my breasts never felt even half full, and even when I finally stopped breast feeding last 6 (long) weeks it took 2 or 3 days before my breasts felt hard and painful. I have always wondered if the necessary hormones to kick start it weren't there as a result of the cs.

woodstock2, there was a discussion on this recently which might be helpful since there were lots of different viewpoints, it's here .