Should c/s rates be published? Naming & shaming...

I would be curious to find out how many women had unnecessary c sections but were told they had no choice. I was told my baby was 'stuck' and had an emergency c section and forceps to pull my baby back out (he was too low I was told). Also my labour had stopped. I was given two bags of Syntocin and had no idea till after DS was here that the drug was most probably the reason labour had halted. I feel I trusted my OB too much, I took everything that was said as gospel truth. Homebirth for us next time round.

Macca you will LOVE it :D

Sushee i think the word "shame" is the problem too, people aren't reading past it, it's a red flag. And sadly i agree, i know MANY women who went for a section because they thought it was a less painful option, or rather, as one put it "If you have drugs for labour you're a wimp, but no-one calls you a wimp for having morphine after surgery".

Bx

Narrow minded people are seeing 'shame' and rather then think just go of on a tanjet!

I find it most annoying that it is seen as the easy way out...im pretty sure I started a thread about c/s post birth here...

https://www.bellybelly.com.au/forums...ever-knew.html

maybe this might help those who think a c/s is easy

:

---

ETA I actually think people are getting too hung up on the word 'shaming'.

---

:

---

Sushee i think the word "shame" is the problem too, people aren't reading past it, it's a red flag.

---

:

---

Narrow minded people are seeing 'shame' and rather then think just go of on a tanjet!

---

Not at all. It's just making a point of the state of our tabloid-like news reporting. Shouldn't have said it was shaming full stop. It's not narrow minded to take offense to that.

People are still able to read past it and respond to the actual concept.

The question of whether or not c/s is necessary or needed or painful wasn't on question for the original topic, so people shouldn't feel bad for not responding to the digressed conversation in the meantime (and yet still have read the thread ;)).

I have private cover but deliberately went to a public hospital because the c-sect rates are lower there. I did end up with a c-sect in the end (it's a long story - 42wks +2 days long!) but I truly believe if I was in a private hospital I would have gone straight to c-sect rather than experiencing a 'natural' (after being induced over 3 days) labour first. I strongly believe the statistics should be available. Not for naming and shaming but so that women can be informed. As all things related to pregnancy and childbirth, parents have the right to be informed and therefore make informed decisions about their care. That's my five cents!

Can we then all agree that using the word 'shaming' does not properly depict the issue at hand, and agree that it's about making hospital more accountable, and move on?

Because I agree that the word was used in a tabloid-like context, so let's not allow it derail the conversation. Because from some of the posts I've read, some people haven't been able to get past that word. I'm happy to talk about the media though and their poor choice of words in a seperate thread. :)

This whole subject makes me mad. Im a mum to Zoe who is now 3, almost 4. I delivered her via c-section at 38wks due to a few pregnancy complications. I do not think that having a c-section is the "easy way out" and that it is less painful than a vaginal birth at all.. If it was safe for me to deliver vaginally I wouldve I didnt elect to have her the way I did. As for those mothers who do elect for a caesarian well...so be it it is their choice, their body,their baby - they are all warned of the possible risks and complications before the birth. I dont see how c-sections can be considered a possible health risk. My obstertrician told me that delivering by c-section was less stress for the baby and I agree. Zoe arrived without a peep and was an absolute angel.
As for making it public to the community about the caesar rates in hospitals... what a joke..no body needs to know, its no ones business but our own. If you have a good obstertrician then youre in safe hands, they follow you through the pregnancy journey and makesure the safest and best way for delievery of your baby iis..they know what theyre on about.

zoesmummy,

no one is asking the hospital to publish names, just their stats.

And there are loads of other stats too that say that a vaginal birth is safer for mother and baby in MOST circumstances. There are lots of stats that say it's better for baby to travel down the birth canal as it squeezes fluid out of baby's lungs. There are lots of anecdotal evidence to say that obstetricians will not warn women of all the potential complications assocoated with a c/s, but WILL tell them they're safer/better off having a c/s. Some obs even tell the mother it's better for her baby because her baby will be less stressed, but the stats reflect that it's not actually better for her baby at all. A health risk is anything that exposes someone to increased danger that they normally wouldn't be exposed to, so c/s (and any surgery) carries a health risk.

And the topic, by the way, remains whether women should be allowed to access information on their hospital's STATISTICS on their c/s rate. I'm not sure how that's an invasion on any one person's privacy.

:think: lucky for me then I suppose that back in my mum's day that c/s were seen what they were for

MAJOR SURGERY

and not for the lets keep up with the jones situation its seem to have come to:rolleyes:

I agree that the media shouldn't have titled it this was ...bit also its not saying Shame c/s,...its saying shame the hospitals and doctors doing these procedures. People are taking there own empathese on the wording of the matter. its also the people who have come in and said no to the question....without actually have had a c/s and knowing later that if the facts were there that perhaps there could have been an not another method used.

As for making it public to the community about the caesar rates in hospitals... what a joke..no body needs to know, its no ones business but our own.

but so do you think that there is going to be alist of peoples names saying jo blow had a c/s for her own purposes...comeone that is breaching all the privacy laws that have been put in place. We can find out the rates of patients who die from surgury related issues ,how many people have cancer treatment and even to how many people have lap band surgery...but we cant find out the % of births that are c/s related....come one..why should one thing be different to the other

It is very easy to say yadda yadda when you havent walked in another person's shoes.
In a world were so much usless information is feed to us...you'd think any information involving the birth of your unborn child would be made knowledge.

The question at hand here is not what is best for baby/mum etc, the question is if statistics should be published as to what c/section rates are in our Australian hospitals.

I can readily obtain the info as to what nationalities/religious groups live in any area, I can obtain stats on which banks are most popular, hell i can even obtain stats on which phone companies have what share in the market.

So with all of this freedom of information, why on earth should we not be allowed to access THIS information?

After reading alot of these posts, i'm thinking that what we all really want is HONESTY from the medical profession - no scare mongering - just the real facts about the process of becoming a mum!

There are so many wives tales out there, and just as many medical scare-stories going around that of course women think that pregnancy/labour/birth is dangerous! A good friend of mine is pregnant for the first time and I have had to tell her "dont read any pregnancy books, dont listen to people talk about it their bad experiences - nothing!" because she is paranoid about EVERYTHING that happens - she thinks every little pain is a miscarriage or something wrong with bub... all because of the stories and rubbish shes been told! Shes one of the ones who is sure to be scared into having a c-section or other unnecessary intervention!

What women need is the TRUTH about pregnancy, the TRUTH about labour and the TRUTH about birth (not the scary one-in-a-million rare complications and problems)!

If we were all totally and honestly educated with the truth, then perhaps less women would be choosing c-sections in the first place, and docs would be less able to scare us into making bad decisions.

I vote a a great big NO.

Firstly, I agree with those that point out that you are not told why the CS is performed. Of course some hospitals will have a higher rate of CS because not all hospitals are able to do them. If you have a high risk pregnancy you will be sent to a hospital that has the facilities and so those hospitals will naturally have a higher rate. The statistic will be skewed before you even start.

I also have to agree that the stigma attached to CS doesn't need any further promotion either. I am currently 30 weeks pregnant and have been diagnosed with vasa praevia, a condition that, unless things change in the next 4 weeks, will require a planned CS. When I tell people I am having a CS I am either grilled about why, given a disapproving look and a tsk tsk or lectured about having an 'elective CS'. Now I feel I have to give a full explanation of my condition every time someone asks in order to avoid the harrasment.

Because my CS is planned and not emergency, it is referred to as 'elective' even though I would have given anything to have a natural birth and have no choice. So even dividing the CS's into 'elective' and 'emergency' won't give an accurate picture.

This all leads to the main principal, it is no-one's business but mine how I have my baby. There is evidence to support the assertion that a natural birth is better for the baby, just as there is evidence to suggest that CS is better. As long as my child is healthy and happy it should be no-ones business but mine how my child is born, and while we're at it, whether it is breast or bottle fed. When judging people for the choices, take a moment to think about the possible reasons behind that choice. Sure, some peoplemay make the decision lightly, based on fear or vanity, but who are we to judge what a valid reason truely is. More importantly, why make every woman suffer because you disagree with the reasons for a decision made by a few.

Some say that hospitals 'encourage' CS for their own convenience. Well this may happen and if you think this has happened to you, there are avenues for complaint. If you are worried about the attitudes of hospital staff when choosing your hospital, if you are lucky enough to have a choice, most maternity wards have a time you can tour through and ask questions. Ask your friends where they went and what their experiences were like, or, get on a forum. If you can afford it, hire a private midwife or doula to attend your birth.

Pregnancy and child birth are all about what's right for you and your child, other people judging you for your decisions or the outcome of your child's birth is an unnecessary added stress.

:)
I voted no, only because the wording for the article was poor..to say to "Name and shame' the hospital seems quite harsh when we dont have the facts as to why these caesareans are being performed.

I think it is more important to have more education on the subject to better inform mothers to be..so that they are making the right choice for their individual cases.

i think it should be made public, freedom of information.

:

---

Some say that hospitals 'encourage' CS for their own convenience. Well this may happen and if you think this has happened to you, there are avenues for complaint.

---

and many times those complaints can fall on deaf ears or you just get a 'we are so sorry letter in the mail'

:rolleyes: I think im over this discussion....it seems to be falling on deaf ears

I don't want to repeat my post from page 8 but suffice to say, I'm still amazed that women think asking hospitals to make known their black and white STATISTICS known is somehow an attack on a woman's birth choice. At what point did this particular thread start becoming about people thinking that by wanting to know these statistics, that somehow it means that people are judging you?

I honestly don't care how you decide to have your baby. My concern has never been about the women who knowingly choose to have a c/s, whether they medically need it or not. Your body, your choice. The women I AM speaking about are the women who were scared or coerced into thinking they HAD to have a c/s. Can anyone else see the difference, or are some of the posts that said just that (including mine on page 8) somehow invisible to some of the posters here?

And to say that you think it's better to make a complaint after the fact instead of informing yourself before you actually get to that point is completely mind-boggling.

I think many of the 'new' posters and members to BB who have come in here have to remember that Belly belly is a gentle parenting forum that supports vaginal and natural births, including VBACS. Maybe instead of repremanding those of us who are voicing for many silient woman suffering...you should go and have a look in the c/s birthing thread and the debreifing thread at the amount of woman who end up having c/s's and feel dreadful afterwards. Ha dyou thought that maybe having known the statisic might have helped with their choices at the time?

The reason for the article is to help woman see the bigger picture.
Take your dame rose coloured glasses off and think of others.

I agree Sushee, I can see the difference, my post before was personal, however thinking about it now about the general public, the more education and information the better. I think that the information should be available for women should they choose to research births and their choices before the birth so they are aware of all posibilities and not get pushed into something they dont want to happen.

Totally agree too MAZ :clap: