I had an emergency C-birth with DD, 3 years ago. I didn`t feel upset or cheated, I was happy to have a healthy girl after 6 years of TTC. Fast forward, I am now 34 weeks with #2, the hospital where I go has been supportive of a VBAC until the last app. Baby is between transverse and breech position. We will try to get baby in head down positon but if not... then it is another C-birth.
The doctor mentioned it being done at 38 weeks or so. I am wondering why they are done early.
I live in Japan and there are many techniques to move baby, external, accupunture etc... but I want to get my research done just in case.
Any insight welcome.
Kathryn
As far as I understand, they do C-sections as soon as the baby is full term, before the due date so that the pregnant mother does not go into labor on her own. Because if she goes into labor on her own, it becomes an emergency c-section.
Because if she goes into labor on her own, it becomes an emergency c-section.
That's what I've heard as well...with a planned c/s they often assume the mama doesn't want to experience any labor (the medical logic goes "why should you have any pain if you're having a c/s?" faulty logic, yes, but not uncommon thinking) or there is a medical reason to the c/s and labor would complicate that medical reason (for example in a case of previa, labor would be an unnecessary complication).
Maybe the reason in your case is so that the baby is as mature as he can be while still being small enough to have a good chance of turning? That's just my best guess. I hope that baby flips just fine
Originally Posted by AugustLia23
As far as I understand, they do C-sections as soon as the baby is full term, before the due date so that the pregnant mother does not go into labor on her own. Because if she goes into labor on her own, it becomes an emergency c-section.
Dunno about that. I labored with ds for 22+ hours and was told by my ob that I needed a c/s. He said it was an emergency. And yet my medical records clearly state "Primary Elective Cesarean" and that I actually requested it!
Originally Posted by Shenandoah
Dunno about that. I labored with ds for 22+ hours and was told by my ob that I needed a c/s. He said it was an emergency. And yet my medical records clearly state "Primary Elective Cesarean" and that I actually requested it!
:
That is awful that he would lie like that in your records, looks like a case of CYA to me.
I think most OBs schedule cesareans early to avoid mom going into labor on her own. The OBs that do not believe in VBACS are also paranoid about uterine rupture and many believe that any labor at all could result in uterine rupture - that is why they schedule cesareans at 37 weeks.
I think it's to prevent you from going into labor on your own so they can schedule it.
I was told anytime after 39 weeks if I choose or need a repeat c/s. For my OB anytime btw 38 and 39 weeks would require an amnio and it's really too early. A good friend of mine did hers at 38 weeks and her DD has had some problems which her ped has attributed to being 2 weeks early (reflux for one, and now she has RSV at 3 months).
convenience and if the mother cannot withstand laboring for some reason then it's a safe bet that she won't start having real contractions until closer to the due date.
While I do see the benefit in scheduling (you can get your own OB to perform the section, plan your partners time off, babysitters for older children, hand picked nursing staff and anest. if possible, etc) in most cases it's better for the baby to choose when to be born and get the benefit of at least some contractions. If there are no medical reasons to section early I think it should be avoided but I do see why it's usually done that way.
I also think that there is a general idea that any "extra" time in the womb once the lungs are developed is pointless, and could in fact, be "dangerous" (seriously I get told this all the time with my twin pregnancy and I have heard it for singleton pregnancys too). People are starting to feel like we need to get babies out as soon as they can breathe before the placenta "stopps working" and the amnio fluid goes down and the baby is in danger...
(I don't actually beleive this, it's just the additude I get from a lot of moms and health care professionals)
I was wondering this too - the other day my friend was mentioning that her last c-section (planned after two "urgent" ones) was at 38 weeks, but that the OB had wanted to do it at around 37 weeks.
The OB's reasoning? "Better safe than sorry".
Now, she's never into labour on her own and certainly wasn't at any particular risk of PTL - and anyway, we live in a city where there are hospitals every five blocks! It's not like she wouldn't have been able to get to one at the earliest sign of labour.
And this whole amnio thing is very interesting - things must be done differently in Canada because I've actually never heard of an amnio that close to term (I would think it's pretty risky since the baby takes up so much room).
I do understand the desire to plan to some extent (I'd MUCH rather know the doc performing the surgery and be able to to plan well in advance), but I can plan for 40 weeks + 1 or 2 days too (although I may just wait anyway).
Kind of like the way mothers think they are protecting their babies from dehydration, gas or weak milk by FF, KWIM? It gives me that same sense. Very disturbing.
I have complete placenta previa, and my csec will be done at 36 weeks. I'm concerned that it's four weeks early, but even more concerned that I could hemmorage if I wait longer (and I don't live close to my hospital). And b/c of my past (two losses), I don't take any risks. As far as the amnio, from what I understand after 36 weeks it isn't necessary, but maybe I'm wrong. If I have significant bleeding before that time and they have to deliver me earlier, then they would do an amnio, but I thought the lungs were pretty much mature by 36 weeks (?).
Originally Posted by wombatclay
the medical logic goes "why should you have any pain if you're having a c/s?" faulty logic, yes, but not uncommon thinking)
Well, I don't think the medical logic is actually that, I think it's "why should you have any labor pain if you're going to have a c-section". And that isn't faulty! I went into labor twice on my own - pushed and everything with no drugs and ended up with 2 emergency c-sections - I don't want to feel labor pains again when I'm being stuck with a c-section anyways!
Also, the Drs are concerned that my c-section scars could rupture if I go into full labor before I reach the hospital (my labors are very short). Also, I think that it's different if you have a medical reason with the current pregnancy - you want to make sure that the baby is safe, first and foremost. C-sections really aren't that bad considering it can save the life of your child.
Originally Posted by GenomicsGirl
Well, I don't think the medical logic is actually that, I think it's "why should you have any labor pain if you're going to have a c-section".
Also, the Drs are concerned that my c-section scars could rupture if I go into full labor before I reach the hospital (my labors are very short).
Your second reason is plausible (the rupture), but did you know that the action of labor is very good for stimulating not only the skin of the baby (healthy circulation and preparation for life outside), but also preparing the lungs for outside life, as well? Labor has many benefits that we may not even be aware of yet, so a trial of labor (as painful as it may be) *does* benefit the baby.
To BethanyB: good luck with your birth -- that must be really stressful to worry about bleeding! I will be thinking of you, and sending you wishes for a healthy birth and baby!
My doc indicated that if a repeat C was deemed necessary (i.e. in the case of another breech, which my first daughter was until 39th week), she'd like to schedule it no later than the 39th week.
Please keep in mind, however, that no one will force you to consent to any procedure. If you do not feel like you are ready to give birth at 38 weeks, please discuss it with your doctor, and request an extension.
With my daughter, as I mentioned, she was breech until week 39, when she turned on her own (even after 2 failed attempts at ECV). Your babe may still turn, it's quite early.
My C-section was scheduled for 12 noon on April 7th ((breech) one week before edd) but I ended up going into labor at 1am on April 7th, which I was happy about because I wanted to at least experience labor as much as possible AND that was the day she was meant to come, BUT I had to have some random doctor perform the surgery. I ended up having so many complications with my incision, I can't help but think if only I had had my regular doctor do it it might have been fine. So, I actually like the scheduling of c-sections thing because it is a major surgery and I want somebody I trust doing it.
Well, if your baby stays transverse, they don't want you to go into labor because of the risk of cord prolapse when your water breaks. There is a much higher risk of prolapse with transverse, and a slightly higher risk with breech.
That said, there was an interesting discussion here a few weeks ago that suggested that labor night turn a transverse baby head down. That would be something that you could explore the risks and benefits of doing.
I have planned csections because of a uterine anomaly that often cause my babies to be malpositioned and I have a higher rupture rate than others. With breech or transverse babies they like to do csections around 38 weeks because of the risk of cord injury if your water breaks. That is definitely a legitimate reason for having a csection at 38 weeks.
Most OBs though for malpractice reasons will not delivery a baby by planned csection before 39 weeks unless there is a clear a medical reason.
Thanks for all the stories/insight.
I live in Japan where the medical system is obviously different.
I also liked having the contractions and labor before the birth of DD1 and would like the same this time around. We live close to the hospital so no worries about getting there in time. I will print out a few things from the net to take in with me.
As I said I didn`t feel bad about the first C, and am keeping an open mind this time also.
Of course still going to try all the turning options. a good friend is an acupuncturist so that will be the first thing.
Kathryn
Originally Posted by velveeta
Your second reason is plausible (the rupture), but did you know that the action of labor is very good for stimulating not only the skin of the baby (healthy circulation and preparation for life outside), but also preparing the lungs for outside life, as well? Labor has many benefits that we may not even be aware of yet, so a trial of labor (as painful as it may be) *does* benefit the baby.
Thanks - I didn't even think of that. I also just found out that if you have a scheduled c-section, they have to give you pitocin in order to cause your uterus to contract.
My real concern is that I go from 1-10cm and pushing in about 45 minutes - so I'm going to have to get to the hospital really fast in order to be conscious for this next labor! I couldn't sit still for them to put in the epideural last time and they put me under general
I've just had bad labor experiences, so I'm pretty mad at my body/myself, overall
Scheduling cesareans early - mostly it is convenience. There are some very legitimate times to schedule a cesarean too though - complete previa, footling or transverse come to mind. With these, like a pp said, you don't to risk dilating or ROM. Too risky for you and baby.
I'd chat with your doc. Around here, most recommend scheduling planned cesareans, but they will also agree to letting you go into labor first. One of my best friends just did that. They recommended she get her cesarean (breech) at 37 weeks. She refused. They gave her the ultimatum of 42 weeks (which she could refuse too, of course). Guess what...she went all the way to 42 weeks and that baby was SMALL! GOod thing she negotiated that extra time for him. Another close friend just had a footling and scheduled for 2 days before her due date - which made the docs VERY nervous. Checked in for the procedure...turns out she was in VERY early labor. Perfect timing. BTW, they'd been checking her dilation all along and had she dilated earlier, they'd have acted.
I'd chat with your doc. Around here, most recommend scheduling planned cesareans, but they will also agree to letting you go into labor first.
Around here, they schedule repeat c-sections 1 week early. My ds #1 was on time, my ds #2 was 2 weeks early. I may go into labor on my own anyways! I have 7-7.5 lb babies, so I wouldn't want my kiddo taken out too early, either! Thanks for the advice - I'll talk to my Dr about it later on
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Mothering Forum
16.5M posts
285.1K members
Since 1996
A forum community dedicated to all mothers and inclusive family living enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about nurturing, health, behavior, housing, adopting, care, classifieds, and more!