Evidence that older birthers need more intervention?

[sunshine_sieben]

But this is no reason for anyone to think they need to or should accept any form of augmentation, older women should be treated like any other woman and intervention only if it's a medical emergency. Not 'just in case' a woman doesn't labour well because she is older - that is ridiculous. If the Ob doesn't want to be patient and give mum a go, its time to change Obs - or the Ob needs to change careers. Labour involves patience, time and it is so important to a woman, it can't be written off like that.

Well said, Kelly.
I think it is ridiculous and actually unprofessional to suggest a planned C/S because the chances are slightly increased that labour might be prolonged or ineffective. How about letting it get to the point were you see whether it is working or not and then make a decision based on facts rather than statistics.
How about a woman's ability to heal and recover from a C/S? As we age, our bodies get less effective at healing and recovering from trauma. A c/s is major surgery. If anything, c/s should be discouraged the older the woman is. I'm not saying that 40 is old or that in every case a c/s will make for a long recovery. Just making a statement to counter the opening statement.

Ok, crucify me here, but maybe there is another point to consider. Of course it is not true in all cases, but I have noticed this tendency with friends whose parents were older.
Often when women have children at a later age, it is for a reason other than choice. It might be because they didn't have the right partner earlier in their life, or because it took them a long time to fall pregnant or even because they never thought they wanted children, until the biological clock set in full force. These parents can have a feeling of this being their last chance and as a result being extra cautious. Now, if a caregiver tells them that this intervention or the other will make it safer for their baby, then they won't argue with that, but go along to give their baby the best chance.

On the flip side, older mother's are often more self-confident and find it easier to defend their ideals. But if you de-moralise them by constantly labelling them high-risk and pointing out how lucky they are to even be pregnant, then this self-confidence can be undermined.

Ok, I'll stop rambling now.
And just for the record, I know at least 2 women who were over 40 who have given birth with relative ease and no interventions.

Saša

[littleberlin]

How odd that a doctor would tell someone that a forty year old's muscles 'don't know how to push'?! Perhaps that could almost, almost hold if, say, you were eighty-five years old and pregnant (!), and your body was slowly failing on you, but really...does that mean that leg muscles don't know how to work at forty? Arm muscles? Tongue muscles? How absurd!

Wouldn't it be nice if there was some encouragement to believe in the body's ability to birth, rather than the assumption that a woman over a certain age will automatically fail at this? It's nice to hear stories of medical professionals encouraging 'older' women to birth vaginally, rather than just deciding for them that they have to birth via caesarean section based on a number. I completely understand the need for intervention in the event that mother or baby is in danger (I was a c-section baby born two months early due to my mother's placenta abrupting), but that just seems strange.

[Mumma2three]

My friend just had her first at 38 and all was fine, 12 hour labour, no more eventful than mine when I was 24. xo