Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tinyshoes
oh yeah! Good point!
So what about "born by cesarian operation?" would that irk you, or be an accurate description for the enormity of abdominal surgery (I am pro-homebirth, not anti-c-sec....and I am definitly anti the prevailing attitude that a c-sec is "no big deal" because it's common nowadays. IT'S abdominal surgery!!! that's huge! owie!!!!!)
|
I agree that a c-section is a big deal, and it is major abdominal surgery, but I don't particularly like the way that this term was presented in the pp ... i.e., the semantics we use when discussing birth can mean the difference between a "fulfilling birth experience and major abdominal surgery", and that "cesaerean operations" should not be confused with "birth"...
I did not plan for two c-sections, I did not want them, I did everything humanly possible that I could to avoid them. But, as it turned out, I did have them. I prefer to think of them as "births" - as they were the means by which my children were born. I labored naturally for a longer period of time than most women who have vaginal births (60 hours the first time, and 50 hours on my vbac attempt), and I was an active participant in the labors and all of the decisions (in fact, the final say, of course) leading up to both c-sections. To try to use language in such a way as to make sure that no one confuses these important, life-altering experiences (the c-sections through which my children were born) with "real birth" is, to me, patently offensive.
To answer the OP - of course, I prefer the term 'birth', and prefer to apply it to all of the different ways that children come into the world.
ETA: Just using Tinyshoes' post as a jumping-off point - I don't think she was the one who characterized C-birth that way

Follow Mothering