Yep, well, I care about more than just myself (cos I'm going to prepare for a homebirth next time, so doesn't even personally apply to me, but I do like to stretch myself for the benefit of other people; I'm a bit of a lobbyist!) and because I care about safety of mother and baby, I'd like stats released for all hospitals performing CS's. Especially because CS's are NOT the safer option just because an OB says so, and because I know that the mortality rate for CS mother/infant dyads is higher than vaginal births. This alone says to me that it's BECAUSE safety of mother and baby is paramount that CS rates need to be transparent so that mothers can make informed choices.:
all i care is that both my baby and myself come out alive and healthy.
I'm not down with the spin about 'shaming', but identification of high rates, and (I agree) the breakdown on interventions etc, is important.
Bringing it back to the personal, it's because I am aware of our escalating rates of interventions (not just the CS rate, but inductions, internal exams, epi's etc) that I will avoid all hospitals, and even birth centres attached to them (I loved my FBC experience, BTW). Not all women know what I and many on BB know, where it takes a bit of rooting around to find these stats, so to have them readily available will hopefully start opening the eyes of many other women and get them asking questions the OB's don't want them asking ;)
By identifying the hospitals with higher CS rates, these hospitals will have to take a long hard look at their policies if they care about reducing their rates.
I also think that part of the problem is that OB's these days aren't trained or experienced in dealing with birthing 'complications' such as breeches and twins so all they know is surgery. It's a corner we've painted them into (as a society, not as individuals or even as a demographic) - they're not being trained in it, they don't get to see normal, undisturbed birth and they become proficient at surgery. So, who the hell is going to reverse this trend if the ones who DO know how to treat these things are retiring or long retired? OB's nowadays are a tending to be a liability in normal birth because of this, and this is why I believe OB's do not belong in normal birthing situations. A breakdown of stats indicates that OB's themselves are turning normal birth into emerg CS's, as well as misinformation, not enough information and the established vernacular about birth being dreadful, painful, geez, even death-defying!
In normal birthing situations, you're risking more by going to hospital than by staying at home. Women who have information about intervention rates may be able to make better choices about where they birth. I certainly don't want to be a maternity ward's excuse to rack up Medicare rebates for justifying the purchase of the latest whiz bang, super-expensive piece of obstetric equipment. And what a waste of money on PHI when the premiums pay for such equipment that I don't want anywhere near me, anyway.
This is just to illustrate how knowing figures and breakdowns has shaped my birthing choices.
Yes, there are other things going on in the world that also require our attention, and I'd rather work towards positive birthing so that I can add the great, constructive energy it has brought me so far to the world.
Risking PND, inability to establish breastfeeding, incontinence/uterine damage/prolapse etc, are all things that affect people's health and quality of life. It's pretty important to avoid things that compromise quality of life, if you can help it. Making people's lives better changes the world, and surely, a better start to life is better for mother and baby (not just mother, not just baby- they are one unit!), where they can make that informed choice, and plan to mitigate the effects of CS and other interventions if they then must be chosen, all things considered and made transparent :)
