dollicapax, you need to check your facts.
The difference in cost been a planned VB (which includes the outcomes of a EMCS and instrumental delivery) versus a planned ELCS is much smaller than a lot reports suggest. Reports which have completely flawed methodology.
Repeatedly you will see figures and risks for ELCS and EMCS lumped together which is worthless information as both are very different in nature and risk. Equally VBs are frequently made to look much more favourable because they do not include the risks from an EMCS which is a possible outcome from attempting a VB.
NICE compared the cost of both a planned VB and a planned ELCS and decided that on balance, especially when adding in the long term downstream costs, that there was very little difference between the costs of an ELCS and a planned VB.
When you factor in that over 35 year olds are more likely to have more costly outcomes from a planned VB (EMCSs and instrumental deliveries) then this difference is decreased even further.
There are huge misconceptions about this, even from within the medical profession, and unfortunately there is a lack of joined up thinking which fails to properly understand the overall economics of health care - they are far to simplified and shortsighted to reflect the reality of how costs are not just price tags, but much deeper and complex considerations which don't just end at the doors of the maternity ward.
'Medically necessary', is a very loaded phrase too. Many women are classified as making maternal choice, and the disgusting phrase 'too posh to push' is used about them. The reality is that this is often a result of mental health not being universally recognised as a legitimate health issue. The majority of women who ask for an ELCS do so for reasons connected with mental health and are some of the most vulnerable women out there, yet they are totally vilified by the media and ignorant HCPs. NICE has done much in their updated CS guidelines to break down this outdated belief, but unfortunately there is a significant amount of work to do, to convey this throughout medical circles, the public and press.
Given that NICE are the body in the UK which draw up cost effectiveness models and recommend the guidelines for the NHS, this should be the information that is considered the most authoritative. I am aware that there a number of flaws in the current guidance - most notably that they do not consider the costs and risks for subsequent births - but in this scenario with a group of women who are most likely to only have one or maybe two children at most, even this criticism is only fair to a certain point.