c-birth/c-section/surgical birth forum request - Page 5 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#121 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 12:47 PM
 
Mom31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: America
Posts: 3,634
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Oh I also wanted to say I don't really care one way or the other if there is a sub forum, what I care about is how that sub forum would be handled and what would be perpetuated there.


mdcblog5.gifsaynovax.giffambedsingle2.gifhomebirth.jpg

 

 

Mom31 is offline  
#122 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 12:51 PM
 
DoubleDouble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I hope truth gets perpetuated there.

 

Inductions for ten women out of ten = Bad.

 

Telling a pre-e woman to eat a special diet and think happy thoughts = Just as Bad.

DoubleDouble is offline  
#123 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 12:57 PM
 
Mom31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: America
Posts: 3,634
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

agreed pp

DoubleDouble likes this.

mdcblog5.gifsaynovax.giffambedsingle2.gifhomebirth.jpg

 

 

Mom31 is offline  
#124 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 01:02 PM
 
Drummer's Wife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Enchantment
Posts: 11,793
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emilie2 View Post

Oh I also wanted to say I don't really care one way or the other if there is a sub forum, what I care about is how that sub forum would be handled and what would be perpetuated there.


Here's the thing: being a natural family living and attachment parenting site, the c-section forum is never going to be some place ran by OB's waving a knife. Real mothers will share their story about wanting nothing more than a natural, perfect birth, but instead ended up with an a c-section. Or some variation, but you get my point. Everyone assumes it won't happen to them, and some even think if they just do everything 'right', they won't end up having their baby cut out of them.

MDC has a chance to be a NFL/AP board that presents a reasonable side of c-sections. People could recommend others come here, over babycenter, especially if the mom is more "natural" minded, or wants to be in control of her healthcare, or whatever. You know, the families that are not "mainstream" (I kinda hate that term, but hey).

The board here would be sensitive to one's emotions regarding a possible or already occurrd c-section. That isn't something you find too common elsewhere, unless you happen to have that kind of real life support. You get a lot of, well, at least you didn't have to push the baby out, or tear, and your baby is healthy, and so on. In those people's defense, they may be just trying to help the new mom see some positives of the surgery. but there isn't a lot of people who can relate to your experience, or grief. On the flip-side, many mothers had positive experiences with their c-sections and can offer advice as to what made the situation okay, which could help others plan for the possibility or provide insight and a means of processing what happened for some.

It's really a win-win, here, so I have a hard time seeing the negatives of a c-section forum here at Mothering.

ribboncesarean.gif cesareans happen.
Drummer's Wife is offline  
#125 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 01:05 PM
 
Mom31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: America
Posts: 3,634
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Drummer's Wife View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emilie2 View Post

 


Here's the thing: being a natural family living and attachment parenting site, the c-section forum is never going to be some place ran by OB's waving a knife. Real mothers will share their story about wanting nothing more than a natural, perfect birth, but instead ended up with an a c-section. Or some variation, but you get my point. Everyone assumes it won't happen to them, and some even think if they just do everything 'right', they won't end up having their baby cut out of them.

MDC has a chance to be a NFL/AP board that presents a reasonable side of c-sections. People could recommend they come here, over babycenter, especially of the mom is more "natural" minded, or wants to be in control of her healthcare, or whatever. You know, the families that are not "mainstream" (I kinda hate that term, but hey).

The board here would be sensitive to one's emotions regarding a possible or already occurrd c-section. That isn't something you find too common elsewhere, unless you happen to have that kind of real life support. You get a lot of, well, at least you didn't have to push the baby out, or tear, and your baby is healthy, and so on. In those people's defense, they may be just trying to help the new mom see some positives of the surgery. but there isn't a lot of people who can relate to your experience, or grief. On the flip-side, many mothers had positive experiences with their c-sections and can offer advice as to what made the situation okay, which could help others plan for the possibility or provide insight and a means of processing what happened for some.

It's really a win-win, here, so I have a hard time seeing the negatives of a c-section forum here at Mothering.


I think if there is a forum than something written like this should be a sticky. Read before you enter. We do not agree with elective c-section- etc.


mdcblog5.gifsaynovax.giffambedsingle2.gifhomebirth.jpg

 

 

Mom31 is offline  
#126 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 01:08 PM
 
Wildwomyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Emilie2 View Post

I was misunderstood....

I do not think dr.s push c-sections.... I think they push interventions that make birthing vaginally difficult.

Like being in a bed hooked up to monitors,

not allowed to move,

not allowed to eat,

people you don't know around you

drugs

unknowledgeable staff

tests,

 

"big baby" is not used so much to scare women into c-section but to induce- which results in more c-sections

 

The fact that you are arguing this is strange to me.

I don't know anyone IRL that has given birth without an an induction except two cousins and one friend.

When I gave birth to my son I was accosted at the "child birth classes" for not agreeing to one. By the nursing staff !!! They could NOT understand why in the world I did not want to be induced.  EVERY woman of the TEN in the room was planning an induction for various reasons.

I did not know much and had not found mothering yet- but knew that was just WRONG.

 

 

 



I'm not quite sure who you're addressing this to. But no one is arguing that this doesn't happen, only that it doesn't always happen. What you are arguing would be strange to me - if I didn't realize that everybody everywhere isn't going to have the same experience I did.

 

I was induced, but this was because I developed pre-e at 41 weeks. Prior to this, induction never came up. They were not interested in any interventions based on the size of my baby. Because I was induced, I was hooked to the monitor, but before I developed pre-e we had discussed the intermittant monitoring. In general, my HCP providers and hospital were big supporters of walking during labor, of showers (they didn't have tubs, to my dismay, but that was a capital issue), of the birthing ball, of whatever you felt like. Painkillers were up to me.

 

The birthing classes I took were reccomended by my practice, although I think I originally heard about them from a co-worker. Everyone's biggest fear, when asked, was of having a c-section. The instructor said "they are a great tool when necessary, but aren't necessary as often as they are used." We watched several films of vaginal births with endless walking the halls scenes and talked about what to do in the early stages of labor since you don't want to go to the hospital right away. My hospital tour was led by a lactation consultant and involved a movie about how important it was to breastfeed right away.


bftoddler.gif

Wildwomyn is offline  
#127 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 01:13 PM
 
Drummer's Wife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Enchantment
Posts: 11,793
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CI Mama View Post





Did Mothering explain what those ideals are and how a c-section board is incompatible with them?

 

I feel really dense here, but I just don't get it. I'm starting to think that I have a really skewed idea of what MDC is all about, because I just can't come up with a good reason not to have a c-section board.


Not really. Those were the days where you weren't supposed to question admin or moderators, and things weren't really up for discussion. A statement would be made, then threads were locked or deleted.

ribboncesarean.gif cesareans happen.
Drummer's Wife is offline  
#128 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 01:16 PM
 
Adaline'sMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,787
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drummer's Wife View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emilie2 View Post



It's really a win-win, here, so I have a hard time seeing the negatives of a c-section forum here at Mothering.


I totally get what you are saying about how it will never be a place that people promote sections, but at the same time, do you think it could wind up turning into a place where god forbid anyone tell anyone else that they really dont need a c section, that their doctor is (or could be) wrong? Or what about the other way around? Are people going to be constantly questioning every womans section?

I know that there are some things that I refuse to post about on MDC because I dont want to have the "no, I really dont think its a milk allergy" conversation or the "sure, whatever....Ill try and "heal" my teeth" conversation. I would hate for people to not be able to talk about why they think they need a section because of people jumping in and saying why they dont need a c section. Basically, I think this forum is an awesome idea, but if people arent going to be respectful about other people's birth decisions it is going to wind up being just like the UC forum.
funkymamajoy likes this.

Holly and David partners.gif

Adaline love.gif (3/20/10), and Charlie brokenheart.gif (1/26/12- 4/10/12) and our identical  rainbow1284.gif  twins Callie and Wendy (01/04/13)

SIDS happens. 

Adaline'sMama is offline  
#129 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 01:19 PM
 
Wildwomyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Drummer's Wife View Post


Not really. Those were the days where you weren't supposed to question admin or moderators, and things weren't really up for discussion. A statement would be made, then threads were locked or deleted.



But you can see even now, despite the posters explaining exactly what they want a c-section forum for, there are still people who are reacting as though it is an immediate threat of being overrun by hordes of surgery-happy mainstreamers.

Mamja and EuroMama like this.

bftoddler.gif

Wildwomyn is offline  
#130 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 01:23 PM
 
Adaline'sMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,787
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildwomyn View Post





But you can see even now, despite the posters explaining exactly what they want a c-section forum for, there are still people who are reacting as though it is an immediate threat of being overrun by hordes of surgery-happy mainstreamers.


Im more worried about women who are already dealing with enough stress, disappointment, or anxiety having to deal with a "NCB is the only way" attitude. But, I guess, from what most women here who have had cbirths are saying, they are having to deal with that attitude anyway.

I really dont think there are "surgery happy mainstreamers" that want to hang out with all of us hippies anyway.
greenmulberry likes this.

Holly and David partners.gif

Adaline love.gif (3/20/10), and Charlie brokenheart.gif (1/26/12- 4/10/12) and our identical  rainbow1284.gif  twins Callie and Wendy (01/04/13)

SIDS happens. 

Adaline'sMama is offline  
#131 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 01:29 PM
 
Wildwomyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama View Post


Im more worried about women who are already dealing with enough stress, disappointment, or anxiety having to deal with a "NCB is the only way" attitude. But, I guess, from what most women here who have had cbirths are saying, they are having to deal with that attitude anyway.
I really dont think there are "surgery happy mainstreamers" that want to hang out with all of us hippies anyway.


I don't think so either, but I'm obviously not getting anywhere with that argument.

 

After I had my c-section, I was honestly glad that I hadn't really posted much here and that no one would notice if I never shared a birth story. Because I knew it would wind up in me being told that I was duped and naive and maybe I would be able to have a baby the right way someday if I tried hard enough.

Kelly1101 and DoubleDouble like this.

bftoddler.gif

Wildwomyn is offline  
#132 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 01:33 PM
 
CI Mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 796
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama View Post


I totally get what you are saying about how it will never be a place that people promote sections, but at the same time, do you think it could wind up turning into a place where god forbid anyone tell anyone else that they really dont need a c section, that their doctor is (or could be) wrong? Or what about the other way around? Are people going to be constantly questioning every womans section?
I know that there are some things that I refuse to post about on MDC because I dont want to have the "no, I really dont think its a milk allergy" conversation or the "sure, whatever....Ill try and "heal" my teeth" conversation. I would hate for people to not be able to talk about why they think they need a section because of people jumping in and saying why they dont need a c section. Basically, I think this forum is an awesome idea, but if people arent going to be respectful about other people's birth decisions it is going to wind up being just like the UC forum.


These are really good points. It is going to take some careful intention-setting & moderation to find the way to be both "natural parenting" oriented and open to & tolerant of the real-life experiences of women. Not easy.

 

Case in point: elective c-sections. I know that in the past, MDC has had a clear stance against this, and I understand why, and maybe that stance needs to stay.

 

BUT...the three women I know IRL who have had elective c-sections are:

  • A woman who had a traumantic unplanned c-section with her first. When she was getting ready to have her 2nd, she was dealing with a SN toddler and had her own anxiety issues. She elected to do a c-section because it felt like the best way for her to birth.
  • A woman who had a traumatic unplanned c-section when she was a single mom with a poor support network, and then lost the baby to SIDS 6 weeks later. When she was pregnant with her 2nd, she had major mental health/anxiety issues and felt like a planned c-section was her best strategy for getting through the birth.
  • A woman with cerebral palsey who had an unplanned c-section with her first and elected to have a c-section with her second.

 

None of these women were particularly "natural parenting" oriented and probably would not have found their way to MDC. Personally, if someone on MDC said she was electing a c-section, I would assume that there was a pretty damn good reason for it. But as you all know, I always err on the side of trusting that women know themselves and their own situation best.


Living in Wisconsin with my partner of 20+ years and our DDenergy.gif(Born 10/09/08 ribboncesarean.gif). Why CI Mama? Because I love contact improvisation!

CI Mama is offline  
#133 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 01:33 PM
 
Adaline'sMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,787
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildwomyn View Post





I don't think so either, but I'm obviously not getting anywhere with that argument.

 

After I had my c-section, I was honestly glad that I hadn't really posted much here and that no one would notice if I never shared a birth story. Because I knew it would wind up in me being told that I was duped and naive and maybe I would be able to have a baby the right way someday if I tried hard enough.


greensad.gif

Holly and David partners.gif

Adaline love.gif (3/20/10), and Charlie brokenheart.gif (1/26/12- 4/10/12) and our identical  rainbow1284.gif  twins Callie and Wendy (01/04/13)

SIDS happens. 

Adaline'sMama is offline  
#134 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 02:14 PM
 
seili's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post

Having read more posts, I'm just wondering - are those of us who were traumatized and who did hate our c-sections, going to be able to post in this hypothetical new forum? Or, are we going to be shut up, so we don't mess up everyone's vibe? I'm getting the feeling that a lot of people want MDC to be another shiny, happy "c-sections aren't so bad" place, just like pretty much everywhere else on the effing net. If that's what it is, that's what it is. But, the fact that MDC wasn't like that is the only reason I found this forum in the first place.

 

Except for threads about recovery tips and such, i'm very unlikely to post in the forum, anyway. I'm finding MDC surprisingly hostile on this subject, of late. I just want to know if the sub-context of "if you were traumatized, shut up, because we don't want to hear it", is intentional or not.


Storm Bride, I sure hope it wouldn't be like that because that would be exactly the same way that people feel who do like/didn't mind their c-sections! That would be completely unproductive and unhealthy in the other extreme.

 

seili is offline  
#135 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 02:33 PM
 
McGucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: among the wildflowers
Posts: 1,245
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

This thread is prompting some interesting discussion, for sure, and I hope a mod pops in at some point.  It may be they're keeping an eye on things to listen, which is good. 

 

I delivered my first child at 25, a week and 1/2 overdue, and he was 8 pounds 9 1/2 ounces.  Nobody ever suggested a c-section.  I was young and uninformed and it never would have occurred to me to say "no, I want to try vaginal."  I trusted and loved my OB.

 

My second at 39 via c-section/induction due to pre-eclampsia, at 37 weeks.  Same OB.  The c-section was because of the heart rate and we were told his cord was wrapped around his neck.  A friend asked me, "Do you believe the cord was wrapped, or do you think the doctor just told you that?"  It would've NEVER occurred to me that my doctor would have done that.  I have trusted her with my mind and body for twenty years.


 sleepytime.gif I got tired of my signature, but I still love my children and husband and miss my little brotherkid.gif

McGucks is offline  
#136 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 02:38 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by CI Mama View Post


These are really good points. It is going to take some careful intention-setting & moderation to find the way to be both "natural parenting" oriented and open to & tolerant of the real-life experiences of women. Not easy.

 

Case in point: elective c-sections. I know that in the past, MDC has had a clear stance against this, and I understand why, and maybe that stance needs to stay.

 

\


Would an elective repeat c-section be regarded the same in this hypothetical forum as an elective first c-section?  I just don't think that's fair.  VBAC isn't an option for many.  For me, I was more comfortable with the risks of a repeat c-section than trying for a VBAC.  I know, take away my AP card.  But if MDC is going to dictate what risks are NFL/AP and what aren't, then there shouldn't be separate vaccinating forums either.

 

I elected to have a tubal ligation with my second c-section, so trying for a VBAC wouldn't have made sense, and wouldn't have been possible anyway when I had severe pre-e at 34 weeks.  I am not ashamed and don't feel like I should ever have to explain why I had 2 c-sections, but that's the norm on MDC.

swede, EuroMama and DoubleDouble like this.

A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#137 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 02:53 PM
 
greenmulberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Iowa
Posts: 665
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I was induced for my first baby because I was almost two weeks overdue and she was not looking good on the NSTs I was having, but since I was so afraid of a c section we went with induction to get her out but with close monitoring. They told me I could labor as long as I needed as long as the baby looked OK.

 

After 44 hours, her heart rate took a serious dive and she needed to come out now!! I was in tears, I sobbed the whole way in. I cried into the arms of a nurse when they put the spinal in. I was so scared!

 

I have to say, I was treated with such respect and dignity for my c section, and my induction was such horror.

 

If I am ever in the same situation, where the baby must come out soon, I cannot go through an induction again and will chose a section. Does that mean I will be chosing an elective section, if induction is an option?

DoubleDouble likes this.
greenmulberry is offline  
#138 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 04:29 PM
 
EuroMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I just would love a place, where I can share about my section and not feel like I committed the worlds biggest crime.

It is sad how many woman who are on this board, who do not feel like they can share their birth story because they had a section, in fear of how some people will react on here. 

Just an honest place without sugar coating it, whether you had a horrible experience, or you were able to find a way to cope with the fact that you needed a section.

Also a place where people who never had a section can come and share information to those who are being pressured by their OB into a section. Etc etc.

 


Happily married to DH stillheart.gif for 11 years. Proud Mama bf.jpg of DS1 jammin.gif (10) and DS2  babyf.gif(12 m/o)

EuroMama is offline  
#139 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 05:09 PM
 
MsDolphin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 432
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I am a member who would like to see a c/s forum added. Thank you!


DS ( 9/2010) and TTC #2 fingersx.gif

 

 

 

 

MsDolphin is offline  
#140 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 06:12 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by alittlesandy View Post

I think there are a lot of stories around here about the big bad boogeymen at the hospital. I sobbed with terror on my way to the hospital for my c-section, and wish I had known ahead of time that it would be such a supportive, positive experience.



Even if the positive stories were posted alongside the scary ones, you'd have no way of knowing which experience you were going to get, though. Your experience went one way, but it could have gone in a completely different direction. I hadn't heard any scare stories, and my first experience was bloody awful. I was terrified going into my last one, and it was actually tolerable (same hospital).  There are a lot of factors that have an effect on the overall experience, and the mom's expectations are only part of the picture.


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#141 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 06:26 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by CI Mama View Post

 


BUT...the three women I know IRL who have had elective c-sections are:

  • A woman who had a traumantic unplanned c-section with her first. When she was getting ready to have her 2nd, she was dealing with a SN toddler and had her own anxiety issues. She elected to do a c-section because it felt like the best way for her to birth.
  • A woman who had a traumatic unplanned c-section when she was a single mom with a poor support network, and then lost the baby to SIDS 6 weeks later. When she was pregnant with her 2nd, she had major mental health/anxiety issues and felt like a planned c-section was her best strategy for getting through the birth.
  • A woman with cerebral palsey who had an unplanned c-section with her first and elected to have a c-section with her second.

 

None of these women were particularly "natural parenting" oriented and probably would not have found their way to MDC. Personally, if someone on MDC said she was electing a c-section, I would assume that there was a pretty damn good reason for it. But as you all know, I always err on the side of trusting that women know themselves and their own situation best.

 

"Elective" is a difficult term to deal with, in respect to c-sections, because it's used in two completely different ways. According to the medical profession, I've had three "elective" c-sections. According to me, I've had one.

 

While I personally have issues with maternal request "too posh to push" c-sections, I also don't believe that they're anywhere near as prevalent as many articles and OBs would have us believe they are. I think that most c-sections that appear to be truly elective (ie. maternal request, as opposed to "non emergency"), are probably along the lines of the second of your above examples, where there are unusual emotional/psychological aspects involved. (This would apply to some survivors of sexual abuse, for instance.) However, the other two examples you cited aren't elective c-sections, except in the medical sense. Prior c-section is given as a medical reason to have another c-section. In many places, a woman isn't "allowed" to give birth vaginally if she's already had a c-section. So, coding those as "elective" just muddies the waters.

 

I believe that when people object to elective c-sections (as in MDC's statement that they won't host discussion of the merits of elective c-section - not sure if that's still a current part of the MDC UA or not), they're referring to the small number of truly elective ones. People are welcome to disagree with that stance, but I personally see it as completely irrelevant to the question of whether one can discuss a c-section for pre-e, or previous c-section or any other medical reason for a c/s.

 

I really wish the term "elective" would vanish from the medical profession, except in cases where there is no medical indicator for the cesarean. The current usage just creates confusion.

Honey693, alittlesandy and CI Mama like this.

Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#142 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 07:13 PM
 
Wildwomyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

No, you wouldn't know going in exactly if you'd have a good or bad experience. But you could know that a good, or even an ok, experience, is possible, which is not part of the traditional party line here. In addition to stopping the shaming of women for not being able to magically manifest a lack of complications, and having a generally reality-based outlook, both of which I think are good things, women learning about these things for the first time could know that there are things you can do to raise your odds.

 

For instance, in some cases, you can, like I did, seek out HCPs who are committed to intervening only when necessary. You can know what is and isn't a real risk so that you can object if HCPs start pushing interventions you don't want (although here I do have to say that I have seen basically every risk possible dismissed on this board as Evil Medical Industrial Complex Lies).

 

I have to ask (rhetorically, it's not a poll), do we want to scare women with horror stories about what the big bad doctors will do if they get their hands on you, the way some people seem to like to scare women about how horrible labor and vaginal birth are? Is the goal actual truth and empowerment, or is it just reversing the unfairness and the innaccuracy? I once talked off-board with someone from here who told me that she was terrified when her OB wanted a non-stress test. Because over and over again, she'd seen people here saying 'Oh god, not the non-stress test! Mama, change your name and leave the state if you have to, but don't let them give you a non-stress test!'  She thought it must be invasive and painful and dangerous. And then she discovered it wasn't much more than a doppler.

Bokonon and DoubleDouble like this.

bftoddler.gif

Wildwomyn is offline  
#143 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 07:35 PM
 
katelove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
 Heck - I recently had someone here suggest a genetic reason why I might have such an "unusual" amount of pain, because I mentioned that I have post-op pain for weeks, not days.

 

 


That was me and that isn't what I said at all. I was offering a theory as to why pain medications may not have worked for you. I thought you had said that, I apologise if I misread. I don't think it is unusual to have pain for weeks after major abdominal surgery. I do think it is unusual to have *uncontrolled* pain for weeks, which I thought is what you were describing. I also had pain for weeks but I was able to keep it well under control with medications.

 

Anyway, this is off-topic but I wanted to clarify as I have clearly caused offence without intending to.

 


Mother of two spectacular girls, born mid-2010 and late 2012  mdcblog5.gif

katelove is online now  
#144 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 07:39 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildwomyn View Post

No, you wouldn't know going in exactly if you'd have a good or bad experience. But you could know that a good, or even an ok, experience, is possible, which is not part of the traditional party line here.

 

I'm completely boggled by the fact that any woman can reach adulthood in North America without knowing that a good, or even ok, c-section is possible (at least for some people - my "okay" c-section was basically a matter of being so badly traumatized that I didn't really care, anymore). I spent most of my adult life completely unaware that there were other women who really hated them.

 

In addition to stopping the shaming of women for not being able to magically manifest a lack of complications, and having a generally reality-based outlook, both of which I think are good things, women learning about these things for the first time could know that there are things you can do to raise your odds.

 

For instance, in some cases, you can, like I did, seek out HCPs who are committed to intervening only when necessary. You can know what is and isn't a real risk so that you can object if HCPs start pushing interventions you don't want (although here I do have to say that I have seen basically every risk possible dismissed on this board as Evil Medical Industrial Complex Lies).

 

I have to ask (rhetorically, it's not a poll), do we want to scare women with horror stories about what the big bad doctors will do if they get their hands on you, the way some people seem to like to scare women about how horrible labor and vaginal birth are? Is the goal actual truth and empowerment, or is it just reversing the unfairness and the innaccuracy?

 

Well, I've mostly posted here for my own purposes, but I do think the "scary" stories serve a valuable purpose. But, I've always been the type who'd rather know the worst case and possibly be pleasantly surprised than have things sound good and then get a nasty surprise. To me, at least, the bottom line is that it's not about "the big bad doctors" - it's about the awareness that there are "big bad doctors".

 

I personally think the main reason why "people seem to like to scare women about how horrible labor and vaginal birth are", is a need to process a terrifying experience. The first time I used the term "birth story" to someone outside the MDC/NCB community, they started at me like I had two heads. We have no socially accepted place or time to process a scary/painful/disappointing birth other than through the "terrify the pregnant woman" anecdote. So...moms see a pregnant woman, and pull out their stories in an attempt to work through a very difficult experience. I think it sucks - but I get it.

 

It's not about wanting to scare anyone, at least for me. But, I can tell you that if I'd gone into my first c-section accepting the positive c-section stories here as the way things were, I'd have felt not only betrayed, but insanely angry, when I experienced my own. I don't mind seeing the positive stories, as well, but I really don't like or agree with the sentiment that we shouldn't scare the pregnant women. I think sugar-coating the experience, and behaving as though only good/okay c-sections happen, is a big mistake.

 

I once talked off-board with someone from here who told me that she was terrified when her OB wanted a non-stress test. Because over and over again, she'd seen people here saying 'Oh god, not the non-stress test! Mama, change your name and leave the state if you have to, but don't let them give you a non-stress test!'  She thought it must be invasive and painful and dangerous. And then she discovered it wasn't much more than a doppler.

 

I have no idea what that was all about, but I've never seen that kind of posts about NSTs. They've been a really minor part (I had one with ds2) of my own reproductive life, so I don't tend to open threads about them. That level of negativity about them seems really strange to me. I guess it must be rooted in the fear of being pressured if things look even slightly less than perfect. I mean - I didn't like it, because of the whole "stuck in one place, doing nothing" aspect, but it certainly wasn't a big deal.



 

CI Mama likes this.

Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#145 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 07:44 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by katelove View Post


That was me and that isn't what I said at all. I was offering a theory as to why pain medications may not have worked for you. I thought you had said that, I apologise if I misread. I don't think it is unusual to have pain for weeks after major abdominal surgery. I do think it is unusual to have *uncontrolled* pain for weeks, which I thought is what you were describing. I also had pain for weeks but I was able to keep it well under control with medications.

 

Anyway, this is off-topic but I wanted to clarify as I have clearly caused offence without intending to.

 



Oh - I had uncontrolled pain, but that's because I didn't take any medication after the first couple of days. I injured myself the day after my third c-section, because of those oh-so-wonderful pain meds (this is doubly annoying, because I still had pain, but I should have had more - so the pain I had didn't serve its purpose, which is a major lose/lose scenario, imo). I only take them now if I absolutely need them to sleep or something.

 

Thanks for the clarification. I'm kind of tired of people asserting that I have "hard" recoveries, when everything I've seen suggests mine are pretty close to average, or even slightly better. (That's not aimed at you, btw. I've had it irl, dating all the way back to my first c-section, and it bugs the crap out of me.)


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#146 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 08:24 PM
 
Wildwomyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
I'm completely boggled by the fact that any woman can reach adulthood in North America without knowing that a good, or even ok, c-section is possible (at least for some people - my "okay" c-section was basically a matter of being so badly traumatized that I didn't really care, anymore). I spent most of my adult life completely unaware that there were other women who really hated them.



 

Oh, well then. I guess that previous poster who just wrote about sobbing on her way in to the operating room doesn't exist, or maybe she just doesn't matter. And me and the dozen other women in my birthing class who answered "a c-section," when asked what we feared about how our births would go. And, the entire women's health movement from the 1970s until the point at which MDC went online. I thought I read about it in Ms when I was a child, but I guess not. After, all, why should it matter?

 

 

It's not about wanting to scare anyone, at least for me. But, I can tell you that if I'd gone into my first c-section accepting the positive c-section stories here as the way things were, I'd have felt not only betrayed, but insanely angry, when I experienced my own. I don't mind seeing the positive stories, as well, but I really don't like or agree with the sentiment that we shouldn't scare the pregnant women. I think sugar-coating the experience, and behaving as though only good/okay c-sections happen, is a big mistake.

 

Not telling only the bad stories and actively supressing the others equals sugar-coating the experience and pretending only good/ok c-sections happen? As opposed to say, actually sugar-coating the experience and pretending only good/ok c-sections happen?

 

So, the answer is yes, the goal is simply to reverse the unfairness and innacuracy rather than caring what actually happens. Ok. It's really too bad though, but the hell with it.  

 


bftoddler.gif

Wildwomyn is offline  
#147 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 08:29 PM
 
Kelly1101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 3,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emilie2 View Post

 

The fact that you are arguing this is strange to me.

I don't know anyone IRL that has given birth without an an induction except two cousins and one friend.

When I gave birth to my son I was accosted at the "child birth classes" for not agreeing to one. By the nursing staff !!! They could NOT understand why in the world I did not want to be induced.  EVERY woman of the TEN in the room was planning an induction for various reasons.

I did not know much and had not found mothering yet- but knew that was just WRONG.

 

 

 



I think I've only known a few women who have had inductions.  One of them was 42 weeks.  She had a vaginal birth.  One of them went pre-eclamptic.  She had a c-section.  One of them was "augmented" (I don't know if that counts as induction) for ROM without labor, she had a vaginal.  I was augmented for ROM without labor, I had a vaginal.  One of them was induced the day before Thanksgiving, at 39 1/2 weeks, for "big baby" and got an (unwanted) c-section.  That last one makes me very angry.  The rest make sense.  

 

EVERYONE ELSE I've known has spontaneously gone into labor.  I'm not in a terribly liberal/crunchy area, but it's a major city and there is a fair amount of crunchiness... I think it's just that my city is fairly progressive medically-- "with the times" I guess.  

 

Where are you, if I can ask?  I think that the level of medical care, and the percentage of inductions/sections, vary greatly depending on region.  That's why we all have such different anecdotal experiences.  Which could be useful to people, to know how things tend to go in their area.

 

 

 

 

I haven't had a c-section (and prob never will, we're done having kids), but I'm way in support of a c-section forum.  I've known several women locally (including the thanksgiving induction) who have had c-sections and feel really crappy about it.  Some of them being homebirth transfers.  Basically, AP/NFL women, who feel like they can't share their stories or that they are bad mothers now, or just not wanting the second-guessing of their birth stories, etc.  And it sounds like a lot of the women here are feeling marginalized, like their stories can't be shared or received, and that's so f'ed up.  

 

 

I think that if there were a c/s board, it would encompass everything-- everything that is coming out here, in this thread.  People with good experiences, bad experiences, etc.  And I'm thinking that, we being the complex beings that we are, there are all kinds of emotions to process and all kinds of things to talk about, even for just one person-- from sadness/disappointment/coping with things not going as planned, to joy/celebration that the baby is here and safe, things that were hard to deal with, things that weren't as bad as you'd think, etc.  Just a place for a frank and open conversation without feeling either stigmatized or brushed off.  

Drummer's Wife and CI Mama like this.

Kelly (28), in love with husband Jason (38) and our awesome babies:  Emma 4/09, and Ozzy 8/10

Kelly1101 is offline  
#148 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 08:36 PM
 
alittlesandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post

 

"Elective" is a difficult term to deal with, in respect to c-sections, because it's used in two completely different ways. According to the medical profession, I've had three "elective" c-sections. According to me, I've had one.

 

While I personally have issues with maternal request "too posh to push" c-sections, I also don't believe that they're anywhere near as prevalent as many articles and OBs would have us believe they are. I think that most c-sections that appear to be truly elective (ie. maternal request, as opposed to "non emergency"), are probably along the lines of the second of your above examples, where there are unusual emotional/psychological aspects involved. (This would apply to some survivors of sexual abuse, for instance.) However, the other two examples you cited aren't elective c-sections, except in the medical sense. Prior c-section is given as a medical reason to have another c-section. In many places, a woman isn't "allowed" to give birth vaginally if she's already had a c-section. So, coding those as "elective" just muddies the waters.

 

I believe that when people object to elective c-sections (as in MDC's statement that they won't host discussion of the merits of elective c-section - not sure if that's still a current part of the MDC UA or not), they're referring to the small number of truly elective ones. People are welcome to disagree with that stance, but I personally see it as completely irrelevant to the question of whether one can discuss a c-section for pre-e, or previous c-section or any other medical reason for a c/s.

 

I really wish the term "elective" would vanish from the medical profession, except in cases where there is no medical indicator for the cesarean. The current usage just creates confusion.

 

I completely agree.
 

 


Sandy (41), Mama to Oscar (Feb 2009) and Aria (April 2012), infertility and miscarriage survivor brokenheart.gif 11/25/10 and brokenheart.gif 6/22/11.

alittlesandy is offline  
#149 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 09:15 PM
 
Honey693's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post

 

"Elective" is a difficult term to deal with, in respect to c-sections, because it's used in two completely different ways. According to the medical profession, I've had three "elective" c-sections. According to me, I've had one.

 

While I personally have issues with maternal request "too posh to push" c-sections, I also don't believe that they're anywhere near as prevalent as many articles and OBs would have us believe they are. I think that most c-sections that appear to be truly elective (ie. maternal request, as opposed to "non emergency"), are probably along the lines of the second of your above examples, where there are unusual emotional/psychological aspects involved. (This would apply to some survivors of sexual abuse, for instance.) However, the other two examples you cited aren't elective c-sections, except in the medical sense. Prior c-section is given as a medical reason to have another c-section. In many places, a woman isn't "allowed" to give birth vaginally if she's already had a c-section. So, coding those as "elective" just muddies the waters.

 

I believe that when people object to elective c-sections (as in MDC's statement that they won't host discussion of the merits of elective c-section - not sure if that's still a current part of the MDC UA or not), they're referring to the small number of truly elective ones. People are welcome to disagree with that stance, but I personally see it as completely irrelevant to the question of whether one can discuss a c-section for pre-e, or previous c-section or any other medical reason for a c/s.

 

I really wish the term "elective" would vanish from the medical profession, except in cases where there is no medical indicator for the cesarean. The current usage just creates confusion.



I was there a term for the c sections that fall between too posh to push and emergency.  My mom had a c-section with my brother and it was termed as elective despite the fact that not having it done would have created long lasting medical problems.  I have a friend who had one b/c she had the worst vaginal experience ever, ended up with a catheter for 5 days and problems for 2 months.  Her next birth was an elective c section, but it made so much more sense for her to have a c-section.


obstruct livery vehicles

Honey693 is offline  
#150 of 366 Old 11-03-2011, 09:40 PM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildwomyn View Post


Oh, well then. I guess that previous poster who just wrote about sobbing on her way in to the operating room doesn't exist, or maybe she just doesn't matter. And me and the dozen other women in my birthing class who answered "a c-section," when asked what we feared about how our births would go. And, the entire women's health movement from the 1970s until the point at which MDC went online. I thought I read about it in Ms when I was a child, but I guess not. After, all, why should it matter?

 

I never said she doesn't exist.  I said that it boggles me that she exists. Those are two very different things. I honestly have no idea how women can be exposed to mainstream society's views of childbirth, or grow to adulthood in North America, without being exposed to the idea that good c-sections exist. I'm actually more surprised that there are women who reach childbearing age with the idea that bad c-sections can exist.

 

I have no idea what "why should it matter?" has to do with anything I said, but I think you're reading things I never wrote. When my mom had my brother by c-section in 1963, people were horrified, but at that time, a c-section really, truly meant that mom or baby would have almost certainly died, because they simply didn't ever do them unless the situation was dire (I believe the rate in 1970 was about 5%, and I believe it was slightly lower even than that in '63). Even then, people were more horrified that she things went bad enough to need a c-section than they were that she'd had the surgery.

 

 

It's not about wanting to scare anyone, at least for me. But, I can tell you that if I'd gone into my first c-section accepting the positive c-section stories here as the way things were, I'd have felt not only betrayed, but insanely angry, when I experienced my own. I don't mind seeing the positive stories, as well, but I really don't like or agree with the sentiment that we shouldn't scare the pregnant women. I think sugar-coating the experience, and behaving as though only good/okay c-sections happen, is a big mistake. (I changed the colour here for clarity, as this was my quote, but not from this post.)

 

Not telling only the bad stories and actively supressing the others equals sugar-coating the experience and pretending only good/ok c-sections happen? As opposed to say, actually sugar-coating the experience and pretending only good/ok c-sections happen?

 

If I'd ever, anywhere, suggested only telling the bad stories, I'd get the point of this comment. Since I never have suggested that, and never will suggest that, I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

So, the answer is yes, the goal is simply to reverse the unfairness and innacuracy rather than caring what actually happens. Ok. It's really too bad though, but the hell with it.  

 

No. It's not. Please find where I said it was, or where I suggested only telling the bad stories, and show that to me. I'd love to read it.

 

I'm amazed by women who have good c-sections, because that's something that's simply not possible for me. However, since c-sections are going to happen, no matter what, I'd love to see more of them be those good c-sections.


My answer to your question is that I absolutely believe both sides should be heard. I've never, ever, ever suggested that people not tell their positive c-section stories, or their views of their experiences, here at MDC. (I do have concerns about the way some of them come across, but that happens in all discussions.) I have, however, been told that I shouldn't tell my stories, and that I shouldn't frame them the way I do.

 

I objected to calling the hypothetical forum "cesarean birth" - while being clear that I am not, in any way, objecting to someone using that term to describe her own experience - because, as a forum name, I believe it labels everyone's experiences. (That's why I suggested "cesareans" - it also eliminates the surgical connotation of "section".) That objection resulted in me being accused of labeling other's experiences. If someone perceives/labels her own cesarean as a birth, then that's the label she should use for her experience. I wouldn't try to tell them otherwise, and can't see any reason why I would. However, I have had people here try to convince me that I should label my own experiences as births, even though that's not what they were to me. If I explain/defend/whatever my own perceptions of my own experience, I'm then accused of trying to label other people's birth experience(s) and/or fbeing "damaging".  Since I'm not telling anyone else how to perceive their own cesareans, I'd very much appreciate it if people would stop trying to tell me how to perceive mine. I think they're trying to help, but they make it worse, not better.


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off