or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by demeter888

  I think you are veering off the topic and making several points about your value system vs the values of others.  First of all, elective cesarians are not necessarily more expensive.  In fact, they would be cheaper than the system we currently have, which is roughly 30% of women in emergency surgeries.  There are risks with vaginal surgery that others might value just as much as you value your  fertility, uterine integrity,  hormonal function, abdominal cavity adhesion...
    You haven't explained why, though.  A process that occurs naturally is not always the best process for the people involved.  It seems like this argument is not really based on something concrete, because you and others keep talking about belief.     The bottom line is science and medicine step in where mother nature fails.  As there are inherent risks in human beings giving birth, to suppose that medicine has or could in fact become advanced enough to do a better job...
  I didn't say the consent form was ideal, but it does outline some major risks.  Whether or not doctors should be held responsible for more is a matter of debate I won't argue; they should on all levels infomr us more and they should on some levels be far more informed themselves.   However, giving birth is much different than eating a meal or having a bowel movement and this is my point: for many women and babies birth is dangerous and that is why they need medical...
I agree that it is hard to believe that a few hundred years of medical/surgical experimentation can surpass hundreds of millions of years of evolution-or even better-intelligent design.  But it very clearly has in many cases.  Otherwise the vast majority of people wouldn't go to the doctor when their health is at risk and there wouldn't be life saving surgeries that we use when mother nature fails to keep us alive and feeling good.  I don't think that means life should be...
  I'm not sure which statement you are referring to?
    I understand and agree with all your points until this very last paragraph.  Obviously my exposure to information on c-sections is quite different from yours.  If I google c-section, the first ten articles coming up mostly do outline the risks of the surgery.  Maybe they aren't ideal, but it's a start.  Women who educate themselves find this information quite easily in comparison to the risks of natural birth.  I have heard numerous reports in major news broadcasts...
  Well, your point that surgery has inherent risks and always will is a valid point. Natural birth also has inherent risks.  I can see a lot of people have a hard time imagining surgery being safer, so I'm trying to understand why.
  This is why I stressed in my question if it proves it for you. That whatever data you require to be present is available.  If people are saying that no amount of studies or data convince them, then I would like to know if they hold this policy in general or only when it applies to something they prefer to not have to contemplate?  I know some people strongly prefer to make decisions based on anecdotal information, and I certainly can see why when there is almost always...
I'm not sure which book you are referring to, but I did recently read Choosing Cesarean, which I believe is cowritten with a female OB and a journalist, each of whom advocate c-section being safer in developed countries. Their reasons were many, and pelvic floor damage is a good enough reason for me; but there are still risks for major surgery and I don't like the idea of it.   However, the reason I started this thread was to understand why there is so much resistance to...
  I have seen a lot of kids and people die in countries and villages where they have decided their age old wisdoms and anecdotal evidence demanded priority.   We can call most  doctors arrogant and short-sighted, but they aren't all like that.  I agree there is a disconnect, but it comes from both sides not listening to each other. It's not one-sided.
New Posts  All Forums: