If you could just pick would it be vaginal or planned c-section? [Title edited at OP's request]

[Bells3032]

If you could just rock up and choose which would you choose to do? There seem to be massive pros and cons to both.

Thoughts?

Well, yesterday I was hoping for a vaginal birth but I’ve just found out it will be a planned section- breech baby. A lot to get my head around so this thread will hopefully be informative:)

@LynseyLoses

I've done both. For me, the vaginal birth was better as recovery was better in terms of physical injuries. I was exhausted though, we both had an infection and dc1 had shoulder dystocia, so came out not breathing. Dc2 was looking big in scans and they were worried about another shoulder dystocia, so he was ELCS. Very easy birth, horrible recovery. I would genuinely not know what to do now if we ever had another baby. VBAC probably too dangerous, but aftercare is so, so bad ime of NHS postnatal wards and coping with that, alone, after c section and blood loss, low haemoglobin etc and on oramorph....no. It's actually so dangerous to leave women like that on wards after CS.

So, if I could choose for a third DC, I'd probably go VBAC if it looked good, or ELCS with paid help for after the birth.

For me the vaginal birth was better BUT, for DC it was more dangerous.

Missed part of that sentence when I typed it initially.

Vaginal births should be a thing of the past in my honest opinion!

...you do realise the knock-on health effects of this at the population level would be colossal... right? And not in a good way.

The increasing percentage of births by C-section is a significant public health concern. It does not appear to be improving outcomes for women and babies and there is evidence it increases risk for a number of long term health conditions and negative outcomes for both women and babies.

The increasing percentage of births by C-section is a significant public health concern. It does not appear to be improving outcomes for women and babies and there is evidence it increases risk for a number of long term health conditions and negative outcomes for both women and babies.

How do you know this?

@GarnetsandRubies

*The increasing percentage of births by C-section is a significant public health concern. It does not appear to be improving outcomes for women and babies and there is evidence it increases risk for a number of long term health conditions and negative outcomes for both women and babies.*

How do you know this?

Feel free to Google the research yourself. The rising rate of CS in the rich world has been a significant concern of the WHO since ~1990 and they have a number of papers and studies on the topic. The rate at which C-sections improve outcomes for mothers and babies appears to be around 15-19%, but rates in many wealthy countries are now above 40%, leading to significant negative health implications.

ELCS every time. DS was an ELCS because he was breech and it was great. I was achy and uncomfortable, but there was no pain and I knew what to expect so no nasty shocks. Breastfed for 6 months, was up and about within 24 hours. Recovery was really easy - it took me longer to recover from having all my wisdom teeth out.

I am a massive wuss, so there's no way I could ever have a vaginal birth. I almost fainted when I got my ears pierced, so I'd probably have a psychotic break if I had to go through labor and delivery. I catagorize it along with running ultramarathons and sky diving: good for you, not for me.

The relatively straight forward, no pain relief needed, vaginal delivery I had with my first born? I would choose that every single time.

The horrendous precipitous vaginal delivery with my second that ended in a massive haemorrhage and long-term damage? I’d have chosen an elective c-section if I only I’d have known.

I’d like to say if I had a third that I’d choose vaginal again but I’m honestly not so sure.

The problem with the vast majority of research around c sections is the total failure to differentiate between c sections carried out for existing underlying medical conditions (mother or baby), emergency c sections and elective c sections with no underlying medical conditions.

It's quite shocking that that is not routinely done and that conclusions about c sections in general are drawn and repeated by the casual reader.

A cynic might speculate as to the reasons for that, but I won't!

@NoNoThankYou

The problem with the vast majority of research around c sections is the total failure to differentiate between c sections carried out for existing underlying medical conditions (mother or baby), emergency c sections and elective c sections with no underlying medical conditions.

It's quite shocking that that is not routinely done and that conclusions about c sections in general are drawn and repeated by the casual reader.

A cynic might speculate as to the reasons for that, but I won't!

Agreed!

I have been very lucky to have 2 uncomplicated vaginal births. Dd (2nd baby) was especially lovely as I delivered her myself and got to see it was a girl. Afterwards I was high for about 6 months. The day of her birth I took her to the GPs for her check on foot and was out and about with her brother on day 2. By the time DH went back to work I was happily taking them both on public transport and walking the 2miles to nursery as well as chasing the 2 year old.

I had an uncomplicated, unmedicated (not by choice!) quick vaginal birth with my first daughter. Discovered my 2nd was breech but in a good position for a vaginal birth. Had to push so hard for my vaginal breech birth!!! They were desperate to c section me. Unfortunately this was for their benefit not mine (and they admitted this). My consultant said that the risks to baby and myself were equal if we went for the vaginal birth, but with a c section the risk to baby was the same as a vaginal birth, but the risk to mum was much higher due to it being major abdominal surgery, higher infection risk of the wound, blood clotting issues etc. I did my research, stuck to my guns and got my breech vaginal birth. 2.5 hours, great Apgar scores, 8lb 15oz so not small! I was on my feet and feeling great within hours. So with my history and risk factors I would go vaginal not c section by choice. But they are MY set of circumstances and every woman is different, so you can’t really make a sweeping generalisation as every woman will have reasons that influence their choice?

[quote XenaAura]Natural all the way, and asking every woman I know who have had to have a c-section, they wish they could have had natural also.
The fact that you cannot lift/drive and most cases cannot breastfeed your own baby after for a good few weeks, find it hard to sit up and move... I just would not willingly put myself through that.
Childbirth is obviously painful but after you give birth you are able to get on with things as normal. Plus, with a c-section, having a consecutive preganacy can be risky if its too soon after your first (think they said wait at least 2 years? I could be wrong here) and ups your chances of having to have a c-section with your second also.

Its the main concern for me with my second pregnancy, is if I have to end up having one for some reason >

Planned c section all the way. Done both. Maybe Im only saying that as natural was complicated for me. I recovered more quickly from the planned section too.

@AutumnVibes beautifully put

Planned c section.
Had two vaginal births - followed by "emergency" section - but in a planned way - just baby needed to be out - and that third birth was best for me

Why is the question posed hypothetically? In the UK all women are entitled to give birth as they see fit, including ELCS.

Sadly not, LittleGwyneth

My understanding is that NICE guidelines certainly state essentially that, but they're not legally binding on hospitals or Trusts in and of themselves, so you're somewhat at the mercy of your local's policy.

Have a look at Birthrights.

Very happy to hear if you have other reasons for thinking there is a legally binding entitlement, though.

I’ve been considering this for my second and I’m thinking I’ll choose elective c-section. My first got stuck and had a plummeting heart rate with the contractions so I had to have an emergency c-section. Obviously everyone’s situation is going to bias them. Had I had a lovely uncomplicated vaginal birth then I’d be thinking that was a great idea.

Obviously no one wants a scar and so the ideal situation would be a straight forward vaginal delivery which had no complications such as incontinence issues. Only you can’t be guaranteed that. I went into labour and really didn’t like the feeling of not being in control. I also had the anxiety of dealing with complications and then waiting for surgeons to be free to do an emergency c-section on me. I seemed to wait forever and starting worrying that the baby would have long term issues. I started regretting deeply that I hadn’t gone for an elective to begin with.

In the UK all women are entitled to give birth as they see fit, including ELCS.

That sounds naive. Lots of things about birth don't go to plan and women don't have luxury of choice, or at least not without going strongly against medical advice. People choose vaginal birth but fail to progress, -> emergency CS. People are advised against trial vag birth after several prior emergency CS, baby is wrong type of breech for vag. birth being likely to succeed. People have premature or precipitous labour so no chance for a scheduled CS to happen.

This thread is about preferences not real world trade-offs.

[quote XenaAura]Natural all the way, and asking every woman I know who have had to have a c-section, they wish they could have had natural also.
The fact that you cannot lift/drive and most cases cannot breastfeed your own baby after for a good few weeks, find it hard to sit up and move... I just would not willingly put myself through that.
Childbirth is obviously painful but after you give birth you are able to get on with things as normal. Plus, with a c-section, having a consecutive preganacy can be risky if its too soon after your first (think they said wait at least 2 years? I could be wrong here) and ups your chances of having to have a c-section with your second also.

Its the main concern for me with my second pregnancy, is if I have to end up having one for some reason >

Feel free to Google the research yourself. The rising rate of CS in the rich world has been a significant concern of the WHO since ~1990 and they have a number of papers and studies on the topic. The rate at which C-sections improve outcomes for mothers and babies appears to be around 15-19%, but rates in many wealthy countries are now above 40%, leading to significant negative health implications.

That has been contested though, and the WHO have changed their position on that though over the years. They’ve now moved away from the idea of there being an optimal ‘target rate’ for caesareans because that doesn’t treat patients as individuals - this article talks about it.

And of course we know that pressure to keep caesarean rates artificially low has in certain NHS hospitals had catastrophic outcomes (Morecambe, Shropshire, East Kent) for both women and babies.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/jan/21/how-risky-are-caesarean-births

I’ve found this thread really helpful thank you everyone! Came in yesterday for induction and after 3 pessaries and some very painful VEs my cervix just will not shift and baby is back to back meaning I’ve been in a LOT of pain for 18 hours-ish.

Made the decision this morning just to go for a section as I can’t cope with this for another potentially 2-3 days and all your positive stories about ELCS have really reassured me

@sken92 thanks. this has been a really informative thread for me too. I have been toying with the idea of ELCS due to medical reasons but was really worried about the recovery but this thread has been so reassuring. good luck with your caesarean and new baby

@sken92

I’ve found this thread really helpful thank you everyone! Came in yesterday for induction and after 3 pessaries and some very painful VEs my cervix just will not shift and baby is back to back meaning I’ve been in a LOT of pain for 18 hours-ish.

Made the decision this morning just to go for a section as I can’t cope with this for another potentially 2-3 days and all your positive stories about ELCS have really reassured me

I was in your position and soldiered on for a long time as I didn’t realise an ELCS was an option, ended up with an EMCS

I think you’ve made a great decision! Huge congrats and good luck

@NoNoThankYou

Sadly not, LittleGwyneth

My understanding is that NICE guidelines certainly state essentially that, but they're not legally binding on hospitals or Trusts in and of themselves, so you're somewhat at the mercy of your local's policy.

Have a look at Birthrights.

Very happy to hear if you have other reasons for thinking there is a legally binding entitlement, though.

You absolutely are entitled:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/29/british-women-right-caesarean-too-posh-to-push

www.tommys.org/pregnancy-information/blogs-and-stories/im-pregnant/tommys-midwives/your-right-planned-c-section

www.nhs.uk/conditions/caesarean-section/

The fact that some hospitals don't carry out their responsibility to provide women with the birth they choose doesn't change the fact that all the legislation says they are obliged to.