Interesting Article from CBC - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 17 Old 02-28-2004, 02:19 PM - Thread Starter
 
charlottesmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: ontario, canada
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/02/27...sections040227

Alana.
charlottesmom is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 17 Old 02-29-2004, 01:08 AM
 
vatechmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 37
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That's so crazy. The way in which I gave birth affected, actually determined what kind of parent I am. I had an all natural, drug free birth with a midwife and I believe that L&D gave me the empowerment I needed to become DS's mom. I believe that is why he BF so well and so quickly, I believe that is why he was and always has been so alert. I believe that is how I became an AP mom. CHOSING to have a C-section denies you of the experience nature intended you to have in order to be a parent. Just crazy...
vatechmom is offline  
#3 of 17 Old 02-29-2004, 02:08 AM - Thread Starter
 
charlottesmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: ontario, canada
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That is exactly what I thought... Especially the part when they were saying a vaginal birth and c-section cost the same yadda yadda yadda-Such a joke!

Whats the point of having kids if you don't even want to "TRY" to experince everything children have to offer?

I don't get it, I think it sucks.

If you don't want your life to change-don't have kids... Its not rocket science.

Alana.
charlottesmom is offline  
#4 of 17 Old 02-29-2004, 05:25 PM
 
cottonwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Pediatrician Dr. Michael Dunn in Toronto has studied how babies react. "In terms of being the absolute safest for the baby, it may be that elective C-section would win out," said Dunn.
What an idiot. Just goes to show you don't have to be smart to get a medical degree.
cottonwood is offline  
#5 of 17 Old 02-29-2004, 05:36 PM
 
Tanibani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Have you read Michael Odent's take on this issue?

Grassroots Network Message 402012 (I signed up for their e-mails)
http://www.cfmidwifery.org/

The following article is re-printed from the online Independent News website http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/hea...p?story=494271 .

"It seems that what Michel Odent is pointing out here is that the standard obstetrical care women receive is so dysfunctional and harmful, that even the risks associated with cesarean sections would be preferrable to the current state of care."

Michel Odent article

Is a natural birth really best?
Unless obstetric policy changes, women may be better off with Caesareans.
Jane Feinmann reports
23 February 2004
Quote:
Surprisingly, Dr Odent says that, given the conditions in modern hospitals, a Caesarean can be one of the better options. His arguments are likely to enrage the natural-childbirth movement as much as they will challenge mainstream obstetrics.

With the guidelines already semi-public, Dr Odent says he has heard many reports of deliveries during which the obstetric team tried "everything" in order to avoid a Caesarean, which too often ended in either a forceps delivery with episiotomy or a Caesarean after trying forceps. "Forceps have their place only in museums," he says with a Gallic shrug. And pro-Caesarean obstetricians are right to argue that long, potentially dangerous labour cannot be justified in the 21st century when Caesareans are extremely safe - and in many ways safer than vaginal delivery.
Quote:
Four out of five of them would make such a choice because of the increased risks of tears to their perineum or anus and the consequent risk of incontinence following a vaginal delivery. These risks, says Dr Odent, are "real and well-documented" - and not an inevitable part of natural childbirth, but largely a result of intervention.

10 - boy
5.5 - girl
Tanibani is offline  
#6 of 17 Old 02-29-2004, 05:40 PM
 
pamamidwife's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
The way we've approached vaginal birth in the past 40 years has been horrific. Instrumental deliveries with drugged or numb women increases the risk of pelvic floor issues.

I agree with Michel (no surprise). We need to get more women off their backs, limit forced pushing on the tailbone and be PATIENT. Above all, I believe in his theory of respect and silence during second stage.

Vaginal birth does not cause pelvic floor issues. The problem is bigger than that: our sedentary lifestyles, increased weight issues, instrumental deliveries, episiotomies, etc.

It's silly to look at vaginal deliveries like they're to blame for lax pelvic floor muscles.

However, I fear a huge trend towards elective c-sections because of the media's playing of this correlation.
pamamidwife is offline  
#7 of 17 Old 02-29-2004, 06:40 PM
 
crazy_eights's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nisht ahir un nish aher
Posts: 6,526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
HOW could someone come to the conclusion that c/sec and vag birth "cost about the same"? That has got to be some really convoluted logic there.
crazy_eights is offline  
#8 of 17 Old 03-01-2004, 12:46 AM
 
cottonwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Somehow, I think Dr. Dunn and Dr. Odent are talking about different things. I do absolutely agree with Odent that interventions that are necessary because of mismangement of labor are potentially far more dangerous than elective c-sec. Sad state of affairs, but true. Personally, I'd much rather my baby be lifted out through my stomach than traumatized by being forcibly pulled through my vagina.

It's strange, though, that immediately after quoting Odent, the author of that article says, "And pro-Caesarean obstetricians are right to argue that long, potentially dangerous labour cannot be justified in the 21st century when Caesareans are extremely safe - and in many ways safer than vaginal delivery."

Huh? I doubt Odent would go so far as to claim that. Long labors are not necessarily abnormal -- that's just more obstetrical mythical nonsense. (So my long labors were not justified and I should have had c-secs instead? Whatever. : )
cottonwood is offline  
#9 of 17 Old 03-03-2004, 04:16 PM
 
yequanamama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: the Midwest
Posts: 464
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
C-secs and vaginal births DO cost about the same when the vaginal birth includes the usual regimen of interventions. With IVs, continuous fetal monitoring, blood pressure cuffs, urinary catheters and anasthesia identical with the two groups, the only difference is that the metal tools are used to cut the women with a Cesarean, but to drag the baby out with a vaginal.

You only really save money with a natural birth.
yequanamama is offline  
#10 of 17 Old 03-03-2004, 04:22 PM
 
Anna Trueblood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 45
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
While I don't support the idea of elective 1st time c-sections, I have to roundly dispute the idea that c-sections universally impede natural parenting. After a multitude of complications, I had a c-section with my son but we still left him intact, coslept, and breastfed until he was 25 months. We practice gentle discipline. If you want to be AP, surgical birth does not rule that out. My parenting choices are conscious ones, based in research, reason and careful decision making. They were formed before the scalpel touched my belly.
Anna Trueblood is offline  
#11 of 17 Old 05-22-2004, 02:16 AM
 
Fluffy Peanut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 432
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anna Trueblood
While I don't support the idea of elective 1st time c-sections, I have to roundly dispute the idea that c-sections universally impede natural parenting. After a multitude of complications, I had a c-section with my son but we still left him intact, coslept, and breastfed until he was 25 months. We practice gentle discipline. If you want to be AP, surgical birth does not rule that out. My parenting choices are conscious ones, based in research, reason and careful decision making. They were formed before the scalpel touched my belly.
I have to second that! I had an unplanned c-section (it was an attempted homebirth) and I've been AP from the moment my son was born. Like Anna, it was something I'd researched and planned way before my son's birth (well, I planned most of it. I didn't plan to co-sleep, but wasn't closed to the idea either). I am going to say though that having the c-section made breastfeeding difficult in the beginning, so much so, that I didn't think we'd make it. My son had problems latching on! I didn't get to see him until the day after his birth and by then, the nurses had given him bottles of formula, despite me telling them that I planned to breastfeed!! Luckily, I got him to latch on at 8 days post partum with the help of an LC! I was even more determined to breastfeed since I didn't get the birth that I desired! I ended up BFing for 17 months!
Fluffy Peanut is offline  
#12 of 17 Old 05-22-2004, 11:20 AM
 
BabyOsMommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Okay, so I'm not as educated as most of you with regards to this issue (I come here to learn, actually), but I'm so dissapointed at the way that article portrayed c-sections. I've not had one, but I've seen women recover from them, and they are not the easy, quick solution to pain avoidance that they are portrayed by the woman (Rebecca Eckler) in the article. So you get the "convience" of planning when your baby will be born, because you don't want birth to interfere with your job () and avoid the pain associated with labour, but you have 6weeks of painful recovery AND taking care of/getting to know your newborn at the same time. I am not bashing those mamas who have chosen to have scheduled c-sections because of risk factors associated with vaginal birth (I know this is sensitive here right now), but I am questioning the logic of any woman who believes that a c-section for convenience is easier... which actually goes without saying in these forums, I apologize for stating the obvious, but I just don't understand it...
BabyOsMommy is offline  
#13 of 17 Old 05-22-2004, 01:23 PM
 
Greaseball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 8,570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Personally, I'd much rather my baby be lifted out through my stomach than traumatized by being forcibly pulled through my vagina.
Sometimes they use instruments to extract the baby during a c-section as well.
Greaseball is offline  
#14 of 17 Old 05-22-2004, 04:07 PM
 
Tiacsophno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 234
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
"The questions of which birth method is safer for mothers and babies hasn't been answered by a large study in which women are randomly assigned to vaginal or C-section delivery."

So this is the only way to determine whether one method is safer than another? I mean, who would volunteer to be randomly assigned to a type of birth?

This issue is getting a lot of press in the past couple of months. Time and Newsweek have also run stories about elective c/secs. They all seem to take the tone that isn't it grand that women have so many more choices than they used to and that c/secs have been unneccesarily maligned. *ugh*
Tiacsophno is offline  
#15 of 17 Old 05-22-2004, 04:26 PM
 
Greaseball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 8,570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Why do a study at all? Common sense tells me that natural vaginal delivery is the safest for mom & baby. No one relies on common sense anymore...we want it all written up in some journal before we will believe it.

I hope that snob in the article ("oh, even 10 hours is too much pain for me to be in!") has the WORST c/s recovery ever!
Greaseball is offline  
#16 of 17 Old 05-22-2004, 04:32 PM
 
Breathless Wonder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
:Puke
I'm really getting tired of seeing these articles.

He who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe is as good as dead; his eyes are closed.  ~Albert Einstein
Breathless Wonder is offline  
#17 of 17 Old 05-23-2004, 05:27 AM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,420
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BabyOsMommy
...but I'm so disappointed at the way that article portrayed c-sections...So you get the "convenience" of planning when your baby will be born, because you don't want birth to interfere with your job () and avoid the pain associated with labour, but you have 6 weeks of painful recovery AND taking care of/getting to know your newborn at the same time.......
Doctors and nurses in the maternity wards do not care about you and your baby once you go home.

They did their job. Now it is time for you to do your job.

They run the maternity ward assembly-line style. If you do not fit into their time schedule, you are "sectioned", like a "grapefruit", and sent home to fend for yourself. Your baby, your problem.

I find it hard to believe that so many otherwise intelligent women fall for this scam.

"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic."
applejuice is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

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


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not 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