Death twice as likely by caesarean

[Trillian]

Sonya, i am not against them when there is a real medical reason to have one(including psychological ones). Regardless of the reason for having it, you just can't stick your head in the sand about the very real risks involved - it is all about informed consent. If you have no other choice but to give birth this way, you still don't need to be scared of the risks, after all many women have them everyday and have no negative outcomes, but you do need to be aware of them is all.

[Tanya]

I think all women should be aware of all the risks involved in such procedures, whether you elect it or not, you need to be made aware. So often c-section is seen as a safe option but it is a major operation and should not be taken lightly.

One of my partners friend's GF has elected to have a c-section because, "I am not pushing anything out of there!"... This really grates me!! Why can this surgery that carries so many risks be funded and yet another birthing choice such as home birth not?

[*Belle*]

Im sorry but I am sick of having these articles around to "scar" people, I need to have a c-section for medical reasons, and dont need these scare tactics of saying my baby may die this makes me very angry and upsets me and I dont need this for my anxiety. Had to say my 2cents next time I wont open the thread. Just wanted to mention that these articles to scare those who medically still need to have a c-section.

[Tanya]

Belle, no-one is trying to scare you out of having your baby... threads like this are simply to inform. Everyone who is involved in the birth of a child should be made aware of all the risks involved in all aspects needed to birth their baby. If you are having a c-section for medical reasons or otherwise you shouldn't go into it blindly, these risks are real.

*snap* MR

[SamanthaP]

It's not even about the discourse of risk anymore. The risks of c-section are in the media every other week at the moment. I think everybody appreciates the risk, you'd have to have your head in the sand not to. The majority of women are not choosing to have c-sections - they are being told they have to have them. The accountability for this lies firmly at the feet of the doctors who are actually not acting exclusively in the best interests of the women, they are protecting their own. So long as women continue to choose inappropriate care givers for their situation (and doctors contine to take advantage of this lucrative industry), then the c-section rate will continue to rise.

[MantaRay]

I am not sure that it is about scare tactics at all. Sure, people get scared when they hear about the risks, that's only normal. But the purpose of informing isn't to scare, it is to inform. I know of someone who chose to have a c-sect as they had trouble conceiving and wanted to take the "Safe" option to reduce the risks. These people are not helped if no-one points out the risks are actually higher with a c-sect.

And Samantha, you are right, the doctors often ARE telling women to do it. All the more reason for us to be informed so that we can assess the information given to us by medical professionals, question it, analyse it, maybe get a second opinion and then decide. We need to be empowered. And to do that we need information.

[myboysmumma]

It is true that the risks are higher (a less than 1 in 1000 choice for vaginal birth, a 1.7 in 1000 chance for caesars). Although there is a double chnace, the chance still thankfully is under 2%.

As long as we keep a balanced view that not all women go into a caesar blind of the risks, and that some people choose them for their own complicated reasons, I agree it is a good thing to know about these risks and make an informed decision.

Any study is interesting pro or against when it comes to birth and parenting.

[*Belle*]

I agree we all should be informed but the way some articles are written scares some.

[Trillian]

I don't see it as scare mongering, but confronting - it makes you sit up and take notice that yes, there are very real risks to myself and my child by having this surgery. But by the same token if I was planning a homebirth and I read articles in the media about the risks to mother and child during a homebirth, that would also make me alert to the ifs, buts and maybes for that senario too. It is all relative to the situation you are in at the time. But you don't run from it, you grab it by the balls and you learn from it - you assess the risk and you make a decision as to how you will deal with it.

In all honestly I think the more articles there are about surgical birth the better. There will ALWAYS be a need for surgical birth - I am not denying that, but this practice by Obs/GP's/medical fraternity in general of unnecessary caesareans simply because they think it is the best/easiest way for them has got to stop and it has got to stop now. If you had any idea of how many lies get told to women about the risks of having a vaginal birth or even being told during a perfectly NORMAL vaginal birth that you need a c/s simply because the Ob can't be arsed to wait for nature to take it's course is APPALLING!!! It would make you sick.

ETA - *Belle* (I didn't see your post), I know that the way some articles are written does make it sound very scary and unsettling, especially when you don't have any choice in the matter, but if articles like that can convince a pg woman who was thinking about having a surgical birth to have a vaginal one because she was more scared pushing a watermelon through a grape, well that's score one for us, zero for the establishment.

[Schmickers]

Okay, well, to put this into perspective... you know how the risk of neonatal death if you go over 42 weeks gestation doubles? Well, it is a startlingly similar statistic. The risk of neonatal death "doubles" from 1% to 2% if your pregnancy progresses past 42 weeks. This statstic has long been used as a justifiction for inducing women who may well not have needed to be induced, in particular for women whose dates were uncertain and who might not have "really" passed the 42 week mark.

I don't think either situation is scare-mongering. It's just being aware of the risks.

[Visitor3]

This pretty much sums it up - number one, the hospital staff would be held accountable for not informing the ob of the risk and history, and secondly, why on earth didn't she read the history/chart when advising on what to do. I doubt this type of thing is common practise and is a case where there are other circumstances that need to be looked at, not just at the fact that the ob is pro-natural birth.

I know what your saying, but I guess what I'm trying to say is as long as baby and mum are not at risk, a person should not be made to feel like they are putting their child at some sort of immense danger or risk by choosing to have a c-section if that means it is in the best interest of the child. I don't know? I think in the country we live in and in this modern age, women put a lot of pressure on each other and themselves and for what ? Education entails knowing all the facts - meaning we shouldn't just get the worst possible stories about c-sections and then based on this , poo-poo this kind of birth. There are just as many "natural birth" disaster stories that you could google but they never seem to get a mention ?
A healthy baby and a healthy mum are more important than silly statistics that don't have anything to do with the individual circumstances of any particular individual at any given moment.

[Trish]

PB, there is the point

as long as baby and mum are not at risk

by doing unneccesary c sections you can very well be putting your child at risk. I'm not saying that every time a woman has a c section something negative is going to happen, just the same as every time a woman births vaginally it isn't going to go perfectly. But the truth of it all is that there are far fewer complications with "natural" births, meaning no interferance, drugs etc, than there are with c section births.

Of course if there are medical conditions that really do mean it's safer for mum or bub, and I'm not talking about something an OB might suggest off handidly, but true physicological reasons then no one would truelly expect you to choose otherwise.

I noticed in that article too that it never did say just what the complications were.

[briggsy's girl]

i've read this thread with interest. i am a child born via a completely un-necessary c/s - my mum told the dr her EDD based on LMP was one date, he said it was three days earlier. she had her membranes ruptured on the dr's date. on HER date she still hadn't commenced any sort of labour, so the DR went to my DAD to sign the c/s consent forms for the next morning - this wasn't a necessary procedure and it's something that should never have happened. my mum was never able to BF due to issues with milk coming in and coping with c/s scar complications.

i wanted to just draw attention to the one thing that stood out in the article Trish initially posted -

The study, which involved more than 8 million births in the US over four years, is the first of its kind to focus on full-term babies born to women with no medical reason for choosing a caesarean over a vaginal delivery, an increasingly common phenomenon in Australia.

i don't consider any of the posts here to be from people that don't have a genuine medical reason. psychological reasons are still medical!! i think what is trying to be said here is the individuals who are told by their ob's (or family - i'm not even utd and my sil is telling me i shoudl have a c/s cos she had issues giving birth and ended up with two emergency c.s) that they should have a c/s. what are the reasons? is it for convenience? i think that's the bit that needs to be pointed out - the article is referring to c/s with NO MEDICAL REASON

FWIW - i think anything that doubles the chances of problems to your child unnecessarily are extremely important to know. a lot of individuals that visit BB (or similar sites) are looking for information and aren't sure where to start. Personally, i havent gone looking for child mortality stats on c/s vs vaginal birth - but i'm a hell of a lot more informed from reading these kind of threads. educating yourself is so important - and it's got to start somewhere!!!

[Visitor3]

That's exactly right, Well said Briggsy's girl !