Ok, here I am again. Embarrassing U-turn, and return to thread...
blueshoes: If I have understood your story correctly, you had an emCs. Is that right? Forgive me if I have misunderstood your situation. If so, undoubtedly, the CS saved your LO's life; and also there is the very strong likelihood that had your labour proceeded as it did while you were at home and you were not transferred swiftly enough to hospital, your baby would have died. CS certainly saved your baby's life, thank god.
I don't know how quickly your situation changed, but if I may, I would point out that lots of births which end in emCs began at home, and the MWs attending recognised that the birth was not proceeding properly and got the mother and baby to hospital in time. I know 2 women for whom this was true. As I said, however, I don't know how swiftly your situation deteriorated, so can't speculate on whether if you had started out at home you could have got to hospital in time.
Anyway, thank goodness you and your LO made it.
Let me reiterate: elective CS is a valid and rational choice for women to make for themselves.
Also, clearly, emCS are remarkable, live-saving operations, for mother and child. To argue against someone who has come through such an experience that a homebirth would've had a better outcome is ridiculous, insensitive, and impossible to prove.
I must say, however, that to use Riven's example here is a little tasteless. I'm sure that Riven asks herself often "what if", and speculating or implying on this thread that had she been at hospital her DD's outcome would've been different is very cruel.
I would also ask politely that the posters suggesting that homebirth is riskier than hospital birth, and using blueshoes' LO and Riven's LO as examples to prove their case, stand back from their argument. Of course, in these statistically reasonably rare occasions, to be stuck at home away from hospital is dangerous. But these are not the best births to hold up against homebirth, and you know it. It is also worth pointing out that there is much discussion about the so-called "cascade of intervention" leading to emCS which often complicates the picture, and leads, in hindsight, to people's conclusions that a homebirth, in their circumstances, would've been dangerous.
Obviously, the risk of something going catastrophically and tragically wrong can sway one's perception of risk; particuarly when considering birth, which is such a massive and life-changing event; and considering our profound love and care for the LO we are carrying and want to deliver safely.
But this can be a "wrong" perception (I put it in speechmarks, because I think that it's not wrong exactly, rather how the individual organises the information available to them, and makes a choice for themselves).
Do you refuse to drive because there is a statistical risk that you might die in a car crash? I doubt it. You judge that the convenience of driving outweighs your risk of being in a fatal accident. Please don't say, well, re: CS, I'm thinking about the baby; presumably you drive with your DC in the car too? Thus exposing them to risk?...
To return to the discussion of elective CS, rather than emCS, which is a different matter, I think, it is worth pointing out that it does carry a risk to the baby, regardless of what blueshoes implied in her swipe against selfish homebirthers. This article for instance refers to a study which suggests that neonatal mortality is nearly 3 times higher in elective CS than VB (although, for both, that risk is still very, very low).
However, as many debates (about ff, weaning, etc.) on MN show, statistical results are not necessarily good motivators for individual actions and choices; lots and lots of factors come into play when we make our decisions.
As I said before (god, I'm boring myself now ), women should be able to choose their manner of birth and be fully supported in their choices. They should not be berated for so doing; nor for any bad consequences.
Apologies for this long post. I hate arguing about such sensitive matters, and it has bothered me all night (sad git that I am), that my choice is perceived as selfish by some, when "statistically" (guffaw) I believe it to have been a safe one, and certainly no riskier, given my profile, than a hospital birth (VB or CS). I do not consider women who choose CS or VB in hospital to be selfish. I would ask that people who criticise homebirthing be more considerate, please. (Although, fair play to you if you've been smugged all over by a RL homebirther. Then you can let rip. ).
I thank you...