Natural Birth Vs C Section

[TurkeyTrouble]

Looking for advice...

My DD who is nearly 4, I had through a natural birth, which ended up in theatre with forceps. That wasn't the horrible bit, the horrible bit was the memory of the room in general, no staff talking to us really, all a bit strange. One particular nurse muttered 'Congratulations' once DD was out, whilst looking at the floor.

A few hours later, DD was rushed to ICU after subtle seizures started. We didn't know what was wrong, was told she could have had a stroke or meningitis. We were first time parents & this was harrowing for us. DD stayed in ICU a few days then we got put to HDU, then home 16 days later.

DD now is amazingly happy, bright little thing. I've had lots of therapy to process what happened to her & us. Thought for a long time as much as I'd love a second, just couldn't go through with it but the therapy made me reconsider. Anyway just found out yesterday I'm roughly 4 weeks pregnant.

I spoke with a consultant at the hospital last year & he was amazing, said I could have a c section if that made me feel better & more in control if I were to get pregnant again.

Talking to DH about this & he's just shown me a study about 'Babies born naturally were found to have higher antibody levels' (article link below) He's not being unsupportive whatsoever but it's made me question everything again, because you want to do what's best for the baby, whilst trying to keep yourself happy/sane/feeling in control.

I just wondered if anyone had experienced both a natural birth & a C section, which one you found worked best? Or specifically having a C section after a traumatic natural birth experience?

Thanks for reading my ramble

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/11/221115114142.htm

My first was CS as he was breech and the scan showed I might have trouble pushing him out. I was worried about possible damage to his head.

He went on to develop coeliac disease at 18. I had been so careful to breastfeed, wean according to NHS advice, and we had dogs and live in a muddy rural ‘good dirt’ area, etc that i was a bit dismayed. Apparently coeliac can be more prevalent in CS children, although the he fact he had very serious respiratory infections at 11 months requiring ABs might have been a’factor.

Second child was ‘natural’ in a James Herriot sense, with lots of tugging as she was quite large and had her head wedged awkwardly. Also BF and the same weaning and environmental background. She has had asthma from the age of nine.

So who knows?

Probably the risk of brain damage to my first child trying to deliver him vaginally would still sway me towards the CS. I might also have tried some baby-turning techniques if they’d been more widely known about back then (25-26 years ago).

I think you have to weigh up the pros and cons for you and the baby and once you’ve done that, go with your gut. Birth method is only one factor.

@Abra1t Thank you v much for sharing your experiences. My daughter does actually have brain damage although we will never know whether that was down to the birth or not. I feel like whichever way I go, Ill always second guess it.

I've experienced 4 births, hospital with induction, home birth, EMCS and forceps. My GP said I should write a book.

For me the first one was easiest, home birth was lovely, EMCS was awful not just the CS bit but the very difficult labour and panic at the end, forceps much easier than I expected. I think my main view is that you can't predict anything and you can have two births that are totally different and someone else will have a different experience again.

I found recovering from the CS took longest, forceps very uncomfortable for a few days, the normal deliveries I recovered from fastest but to be honest that means nothing about what you have or will experience. I did find the baby who was delivered by CS was the one who was sick alot, particularly chest infections. The first two years I was at the doctors a lot. Is that a coincidence or due to the delivery? I haven't a clue.

I hope it goes well whatever you decide.

It does depend on why she needed forceps, what was her size, how it affected her long term and how it affected you.

In view of the information given I'd say go c section. My first was a traumatic emc section. Sec d a lovely calm elective c section

The study your husband cited is neither here nor there, there are an extraordinarily high number of influences on a child’s ability to fight off infection. Millions of babies are born by C section with few adverse effects.
Having read your story I think a C Section is an obvious good option. Birth is risky and it sounds like you went through hell with a narrow miss regarding your daughter.

That study also says breastfeeding produces 3.5x more antibodies than formula feeding when babies were vaginally delivered, which suggests to me that bf will quickly make up any shortfall.

I would say two things; that you can find a survey or a stat to support almost any pov but in a culture where we are well nourished and have access to good care, it's dancing on a pinhead - tiny increments. And secondly, that doing what makes you feel sane/happy/in control IS what's good for the baby, at least pre-natally.

My first was a traumatic vaginal birth and ended in forceps and severe blood loss due to baby being massive.
My next two were both C-sections as again they were massive,I enjoyed both C-sections as the atmosphere was calm and I recovered much better and faster.

I’ve had an emcs and a vbac.
If there’s a risk to the baby in anyway have the CS.
I recovered really quickly from my emcs, much quicker than most but my vbac with episiotomy was so much easier to recover from. A CS is a major op which you don’t get recovery time from and you get a shelf, still get incontinence issues when you get older or when youre young if you’re really unlucky.
Im not anti cs, I was born by crash CS and my eldest would not have survived a normal birth but I wouldn’t have one for my benefit but I would if it was the best option for the baby.

I've had both and would go for the CS in your situation but time it quite close to your due date.

I had an ELCS with DS. This is completely
anecdotal but I'll share anyway.

DS was a big baby 10lbs 10oz but I was told there was no medical need for a C-section. I however weighed my options and the risks and decided it was the right thing for me so I had a maternal request C-section at 39 weeks exactly. Having read a similar study to your DH I fought to breastfeed but ultimately wasn't successful. I beat myself up about this for a long time.

DS is now 3, still high percentile, no health issues or allergies. He's a beautiful healthy and happy child just as he would have been if I had had a vaginal delivery and breastfed (probably). Ultimately I made the best choices for both me and DS. Birth is a major thing for your body to go through and you need to do what's best physically and mentally for you both.

I've only had two elective sections so can't comment on which is better but all I can say is that I had excellent experiences both times. I breastfed both my DC, which I was keen to do. No idea on the antibodies thing, other than I imagine as a PP said breastfeeding makes more of a difference.

I also wanted to say that your DH shouldn't really be passing comment either way on your decision other than to be supportive of whatever it is. It's not him who has to give birth and deal with the physical/psychological after effects. Given that an elective section is probably on par with a straightforward vaginal delivery in terms of what is safest for baby (and almost the same for safety for you- it is very very safe) then it's a perfectly sensible decision, should it be what you choose.

Good luck, whatever you decide.

Thank you so much all for your thoughts & experiences. It really helps. ❤️

I’m sorry to hear this about your daughter but glad to hear that she is a happy thriving girl and obviously has a devoted mother.

Yes, sometimes we can’t win for losing. Don’t overthink it. 💐 You will know what’s best.

I've had 3 natural births heading for my 4th soon. All 3 were breastfed too. Now one has asthma. Usually we'll in herself though. One always gets the bugs that's going round then getting chest infections and one that seems to miss everything possible.
It just down to luck and genetics I think. Didn't do anything different with any of them and they are all different. Just something to think about

I’d say CS as well, looks like the risks are higher for you with natural birth, and you can mitigate any small CS issues for baby by breastfeeding, giving your baby lots of antibodies etc, and also by offering probiotics when it’s age appropriate (apparently their gut flora also suffers from CS, but again you can also mitigate that with BF).

and you don’t know if that study looked at CS + breastfeeding or CS without, and eliminated any other factors…

My anecdata: two big babies, both c sections, both ebf.

I have asthma and lived on antibiotics and steroids as a kid. DH ridiculously strong immune system, never ill. We both have eczema and hay fever, and my side is riddled with all three.

Both DC touch wood very healthy. Constant doses from nursery but dd1 who is 4 has only ever had one antibiotic for a skin infection. She has had steroids for viral wheeze once. She has a peanut allergy which was a known risk given the family history.

Dd2 who is 2 has seen a doctor once outside of the vaccination schedule, never needed an antibiotic or anything other than Calpol.

Both have eczema.

They clearly take after DH.

I have no worries about their deliveries, and I recovered well and found them very calm.

I suspect it's much like breastfeeding - there may be risks or benefits one way or another but I've never yet seen any evidence that you can gather a group of 30 year olds and identify their methods of delivery or how they were fed as a baby. Life is full of decisions and risks and how they play out and interact is complex.