Why Are People Against Elective C-Sections?? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:07 AM - Thread Starter
 
karina5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,917
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Okay, I know I am on MDC. And *I* wouldn't have a C-Section by choice, personally.

But why such a backlash against them? Isn't it in the general realm of "A Woman's Right to Choose" and all that? And shouldn't a person be able to have the birth experience THEY want, just as there are Mama's here who choose to have an unassisted birth.

I am all for a person having a natural and/or unassisted birth, but really, there is risk involved in ANY method of childbirth.

So why are people so against a mother having an elective c-section if she wishes to do so?
karina5 is offline  
#2 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:12 AM
 
Ruthla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 47,607
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
I think that many women choosing elective C/S are NOT fully informed of the risks, including the risks to future pregnancies.

Ruth, single mommy to Leah, 19 (in Israel for another school year), Hannah, 18 (commuting to college), and Jack, 12(homeschooled)
Ruthla is offline  
#3 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:15 AM
 
fek&fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: down in the hunker
Posts: 9,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It raises health care costs for everybody. Especially if it leads to babies who aren't ready to be born.


(Note - this comment is about the question asked, not about your own personal c-section or premature baby.)
fek&fuzz is offline  
#4 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:16 AM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It affects our country's health as a whole, it costs us unnecessary money both through the procedure and the higher negative health outcomes for mother and baby. The increase in popularity of the procedure puts more women at risk to be pushed into Csections when they do not need or possible even when they do not want them. SO you get hospitals with 40-50% Csection rates and higher...it leads to not being able to find hospitals with acceptable rates.

There are also arguments that the woman does get a choice but the child is put at greater risk....which is not an argument I am sure I want to get into since it would probably stray into topics not allowed....

I guess there's a lot of reasons. I also believe the WHO has a large discussion on this, which I will try and locate.

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#5 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:17 AM - Thread Starter
 
karina5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,917
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruthla View Post
I think that many women choosing elective C/S are NOT fully informed of the risks, including the risks to future pregnancies.


But what if someone is informed. And does not want anymore kids? I mean, really, there is some risk involved, but still, the number of deaths is not very high.

I'm honestly not trying to be a pain with this. I'm just genuinely curious why many people are pro "woman's choice" but when it comes to this they sort of backtrack on that thinking.
karina5 is offline  
#6 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:19 AM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It's not just death rates...it's increased health problems for the mother, increased NICU time for the baby, increased respitory distress/illness for the baby, etc etcetc...and the procedure is quite costly in and of itself, risks aside.

Then there is the fact that it can hinder breastfeeding intiation/ability to breastfeed, which leads to more health problems...etc...

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#7 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:24 AM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
some examples:

Quote:
Cesarean carries twice the risk of injury and death for both mother and baby. Women with cesarean experience double the rate of hysterectomy, blood transfusion, admission to intensive care, prolonged hospital stay and death, compared to mother who delivered vaginally. Babies born by cesarean were 45 percent more likely to be in the neonatal intensive care unit for 7 days and 41-82 percent more likely to die than babies born vaginally.
Villar, et al., British Medical Journal, 2007;335:1025, 17 November

Quote:
Rehospitalizations in the first 30 days after giving birth were 2.3 times more likely in planned cesarean than with planned vaginal births. The leading causes of rehospitalization after a planned cesarean were wound complications and infection. Hospital costs were 76 percent higher for women with planned cesarean, and hospital stays were 77 percent longer.
Declercq, et al. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2007 Mar; 109(3):669-77

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#8 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:25 AM
 
bri276's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 6,050
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm not against elective c-sections in certain cases (previous history of stillbirth, for one). What I'm against is the lack of information given to women about the risks to the baby regarding lung development, and the higher mortality rates for both mother and child. I'm against babies being born prematurely for no reason. I believe most women who make this choice are not fully informed by their OBs, as they should be, because many OBs like, or even prefer, c-sections to vaginal births, which are more risky for them malpractice-wise.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7137945.stm

DD1 7/13/05 DD2 9/20/10
bri276 is offline  
#9 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:28 AM
 
Missy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: virginia
Posts: 4,932
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The immediate risks to an infant are increased, but, additionally, there are long term implications. The mother is going to be on more medication, which, in turn, can impact bfing. Also, there is also a belief within the medical/scientific field that children born via c/s have an increased risk of allergies. It has something to do with the flora in the birth canal. I have three children. My oldest was born vaginally, no allergies. My second was born via emergency c/s after pushing for more than two hours, so my guess is he was at least somewhat exposed to the flora--no allergies. My youngest was delivered via planned c/s due to complications discovered during the previous emergency c/s. At five years old, he has more than 20 known food allergies. Connection? I don't know.
Missy is offline  
#10 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:30 AM
 
ananas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,988
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruthla View Post
I think that many women choosing elective C/S are NOT fully informed of the risks, including the risks to future pregnancies.
Yup, this. They think it's an easy way out, when really, it's much harder on the body and comes with many risks for the mother and baby. There was a study done recently that showed elective c-sections lead to more breathing problems. Elective c-sections seem to be scheduled BEFORE the due date, which can be two weeks off, so it's a lot of babies being born too early.

Newly single, chronically sleep deprived mama to my little wild thang wild.gif, born 11/17/12 

fly-by-nursing1.gif

ananas is offline  
#11 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:37 AM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 44,408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fek&fuzz View Post
It raises health care costs for everybody. Especially if it leads to babies who aren't ready to be born.


(Note - this comment is about the question asked, not about your own personal c-section or premature baby.)
This.

I have only a hint of a "problem" with it if the woman is paying for it out of pocket.

But if she's using insurance, or government health care then it's not a wise choice. Those don't cover elective procedures as a rule (cosmetic etc) so why would they cover an elective C-section?

-Angela
alegna is offline  
#12 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 01:44 AM
 
dlm194's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,101
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Are you asking just about the "too posh to push" c-section or do you include women who choose a repeat c-section or who had a traumatic vaginal birth and request a c-section?

In general "elective" c-sections are normalizing surgical birth. Your body is meant to pass a baby out of your vagina. Why is there even a push for elective c-sections? This blows my mind.

As the demand and push for elective c-sections go up (therefore normalizing it as a method of birth), it makes it more difficult for women to have a normal vaginal birth. And forget VBAC. Since c-sections are so common, women desiring a vaginal birth after a c-section are seen as radical. They are told they are putting themselves and their babies at risk. But major abdominal surgery is okay. Hmmm..... Go figure.

True choice in birth is one thing. Choosing a c-section is becoming much easier than choosing vaginal birth.

Proud mommy 9/2004 ribboncesarean.gif , 11/2007 vbac.gif, 2/2011 ribboncesarean.gif
ICAN of New Jersey --> find 2010 NJ hospital birth stats here!

dlm194 is offline  
#13 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 02:07 AM
 
groovynaturemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i find it strange that any woman would want to have her abdomen cut open through all the muscle layers on a completely voluntary basis providing that she or her baby were not in need of it as a lifesaving measure. i personally would not want to experience a far longer recovery, not be able to hold my baby right after birth (i'm talking seconds of the baby coming out), not be able to carry anything heavier than my baby for 6+ weeks, etc. did i mention how sketched out i'd be about the epidural? i mean, someone hitting into my epidural space is pretty risky- you have to sign a waiver and everything. same with the c-section. i guess i'm against major elective surgery in general, for whid i'd be signing a paper acknowleging possible complications up to and including paralysis or death. that and the fact that it drives up healthcare costs for everyone else (and to think there are already people out there who can't afford insurance- i don't know how they will with the ever increasing c-section rate as it is)
groovynaturemama is offline  
#14 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 02:19 AM
 
Robinna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My basic philosophy is that I support whatever choices an informed woman makes for her birthing. That being said, I have a problem with the trend towards spurious or cosmetic surgical births.

For me, it's really a feminist issue. I believe firmly that most women who would choose an elective c/s are NOT completely informed, because I find it impossible to believe that if they WERE completely informed, they would make this choice. It is just too fundamentally illogical to choose surgery if you don't *have* to - it is a very rare person who, in posession of all the facts, would deliberately choose what is so obviously a riskier path. So. I believe that *most* women who want c/s "instead" have been sold a bill of goods through the medicalized birth model that our culture embraces, and each time a woman makes that choice it feeds into our cultural acceptance of medicalized birth as the "norm". And the stronger the medical model of birth becomes entrenched, the harder it becomes for those of us who *do* know, to opt out. So, bottom line, I believe that the trend towards elective c/s sets precedents that limit my choices and the future birthing choices of my daughter, sister, nieces, friends...

Now. If a woman is TRULY informed, and still chooses elective c/s? For sure - her body, her choice. But I think it's a very rare informed woman who would make that choice.
Robinna is offline  
#15 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 02:29 AM
 
LaLaLaLa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,633
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I had an elective c-section for my second child. I was VERY much informed of the risks and possible complications, and pressured by my Ob/Gyn NOT to have one. After explaining myself and signing a bunch of waivers, I was in business.

In my particular case, things worked out better for everyone involved. My first birth was traumatic. My dd tore through my body to the extent that moments after she was born she was handed to my dh and I was rushed off to have emergency repair surgery under general anesthesia. I didn't hold her. I didn't breastfeed her. Dh gave her a bottle. I don't remember anything from the first day or so, and I was on a great deal of medication (morphine, I think). Our nursing relationship (either as a result of this or a totally separate issue) was never really strong. I couldn't stand without assistance for two weeks. My body wasn't right for months afterward.

Before I became pregnant again, I made certain that my doctors would perform a c-section. If they had said no, I probably would not have had my ds.

Ds's birth: I knew exactly when it would occur, which eliminated any stress of childcare for dd. My parents live a couple of hours away and there was nobody else I felt confident watching dd if I were to go into labor in the middle of the night or something. A childhood friend of mine is a labor and delivery nurse at the hospital, and she specifically planned to be there to work with me. After ds was born, he was brought to me to touch and examine before visiting with dh for a few minutes as I had my tubes tied (since my abdomen was already going to be open and all, it made more sense to us than scheduling a separate surgery) and was sewn up. Ten minutes after ds was born, we were cuddled in bed together, breastfeeding. The next day I was up and showering, a feat it took me two weeks to accomplish after my first birth.

In terms of recovery time, things were better for me. In terms of stress, things were better for all involved. After having dd, dh and my mom really thought I might die, as the blood loss and the doctors' reactions were so dramatic. In terms of medical costs, I would imagine things were similar, as my first birth ended in emergency surgery, as opposed to planned surgery the second time around, plus I avoided an additional surgery by having a tubal ligation at the same time as the c-section.

An elective c-section is by no means right for everyone, and I made the decision the first time around that it was not right for me. But for my second pregnancy.... I wouldn't have had it any other way.
LaLaLaLa is offline  
#16 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 03:30 AM
 
DoomaYula's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlm194 View Post


As the demand and push for elective c-sections go up (therefore normalizing it as a method of birth), it makes it more difficult for women to have a normal vaginal birth. And forget VBAC. Since c-sections are so common, women desiring a vaginal birth after a c-section are seen as radical. They are told they are putting themselves and their babies at risk. But major abdominal surgery is okay. Hmmm..... Go figure.
That. I believe elective c-s make it harder for other women to have vaginal births. As the c-s rate gets higher and higher, soon vaginal birth won't be the norm, and it will be difficult to find a provider willing to "allow" it.

Quote:
believe that *most* women who want c/s "instead" have been sold a bill of goods through the medicalized birth model that our culture embraces
That too, totally. Most women I know who had c-s think it was the greatest thing since the invention of electricity. To hear them, you'd think it was a day at the beach, and that vaginal birth is for women who want to get "stretched out."

treehugger.gif Erika
mom of twins.gif (8)  blahblah.gif(5) thumbsuck.gif (3) and baby.gif born at home on Christmas day! 
DoomaYula is offline  
#17 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 03:35 AM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
I think that many women choosing elective C/S are NOT fully informed of the risks, including the risks to future pregnancies.
Great answers everyone! I for one, do not object to any womans 100% fully informed choice, but it is all but impossible to make a fully informed, unbiased choice in a culture that asserts that Surgical/Interventive deliveries are WAY safer than they are and is woefully undereducated about the physiology of natural birth.
dinahx is offline  
#18 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 05:28 AM
 
mwherbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 5,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
what elective c-sections have shown us is that C-sections are not as life saving as we use to think-- there is a higher infant mortality rate associated with term elective c-sections--
there is also a maternal mortality rate associated with c-section-- I almost think that we need bookies to be advisors someone who can number crunch and give you understandable odds -- I also think that there is a bias that has to do with personal interest on the physicians part to guide a patient to decide that surgery is best- this puts an OB in the position of doing what is perceived as the most life saving care and protects them from law suits even if what it is,is inferior more dangerous care--
mwherbs is offline  
#19 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 10:45 AM - Thread Starter
 
karina5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,917
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlm194 View Post

Your body is meant to pass a baby out of your vagina.
.

I know what you're saying, but our bodies are meant to do a lot of things that medicine has changed over the last century. Some could argue some of this is good, and some not so much.
karina5 is offline  
#20 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 11:10 AM
 
turtlewomyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
1. If other women have the right to choose elective c-sections then I should have the right to choose the type of birth I want. I want an HBAC next time, but because of Florida law and the birthing climate in my area, I will have to travel 3 hours and rent a house in order to do so. If you are going to support a woman's right to choose, we should be supporting EVERY woman's right to choose.

2. I am concerned that women choosing an elective c-section are not informed of all the risks, and that they have doctors pushing them into the decision. I know that I was pushed into an unwanted c-section and I can imagine that there are doctors out there telling women that a c-section is safer than vaginal for them and their baby (which is simply not true).

3. And like others have said that the rising c-section rate will affect us all and the birth choices available to us.
turtlewomyn is offline  
#21 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 11:32 AM
 
dahlsk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
As someone who is lucky enough to have health insurance, but is seriously strained by the $1200 a month I will have to pay during my maternity leave to keep my coverage, I think the increased costs of medicalized birthing is very important to remember. Obviously, health care costs are out of control, and this hurts everyone (unless you're the lucky one who can pay cash for a c-s). It's a symptom of our whole health insurance disaster: don't pay for natural processes (HB, prevention, etc.) but cover the really expensive technical procedures needed once things get too far advances for the simpler fix.

I have a friend who was excluded from coverage for her birth because she was 7 days from coverage after a 1 year black out period. Not to mention the fact that the black out period was instituted because she changed the type of coverage she had after years with the same company, not that she was brand new to the company!

She was basically told that if she had the baby at home in the tub and then called 911 for assistance, they would take her to the hospital and cover that as it was "an emergency" but if she planned in advance for a natural hospital, bc or home birth, they would cover nothing.
dahlsk is offline  
#22 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 11:44 AM
 
Teenytoona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,904
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinna View Post
My basic philosophy is that I support whatever choices an informed woman makes for her birthing. That being said, I have a problem with the trend towards spurious or cosmetic surgical births.

For me, it's really a feminist issue. I believe firmly that most women who would choose an elective c/s are NOT completely informed, because I find it impossible to believe that if they WERE completely informed, they would make this choice. It is just too fundamentally illogical to choose surgery if you don't *have* to - it is a very rare person who, in posession of all the facts, would deliberately choose what is so obviously a riskier path. So. I believe that *most* women who want c/s "instead" have been sold a bill of goods through the medicalized birth model that our culture embraces, and each time a woman makes that choice it feeds into our cultural acceptance of medicalized birth as the "norm". And the stronger the medical model of birth becomes entrenched, the harder it becomes for those of us who *do* know, to opt out. So, bottom line, I believe that the trend towards elective c/s sets precedents that limit my choices and the future birthing choices of my daughter, sister, nieces, friends...

Now. If a woman is TRULY informed, and still chooses elective c/s? For sure - her body, her choice. But I think it's a very rare informed woman who would make that choice.


signature currently in transition
Teenytoona is offline  
#23 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:12 PM
 
nausicaamom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: babymooning
Posts: 1,766
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My biggest beef with the increased cesarean rate is that instead of the uneventful VBAC I should be having, I am having a repeat section because the hoops I would have to jump through to get a VBAC would have put entirely too much strain on myself, the baby and my entire family. I am all too aware of the increased risks that come with the surgery, so while it can be said I am making an informed choice based on my personal circumstances it is by no means a willing choice and I'm sure one that many women having repeat sections find themselves in whether they are aware of it or not.
nausicaamom is offline  
#24 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 12:40 PM
 
MsBlack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SE MO
Posts: 3,609
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am pro choice, and I very much DO think this is a feminist issue. That said--I have to also say that a very large part of this feminist issue is that women now have been raised in such a highly medicalized environment that many who presumably 'choose' such things as elective csec are NOT making an informed choice--they have no idea of, or belief in, the normalcy and perfection of their own bodies and birthing capacities--and how every bit of the way that birth is designed, is FOR THEIR OWN AND CHILDREN'S HIGHEST WELLBEING. THAT to me is a feminist issue worth fighting for.

Our range of choices have been under a state of seige for quite some time, and simply 'knowing all the risks of csec' is STILL not making an informed choice. The ripoff to women (and our children and partners) being perpetrated through this so-called 'informed consent' is quite insidious, devious and pervasive. You see, the problem is, women today (in general, and present company obviously excluded) is that we are never taught how perfectly suited natural birth is to the short term and long term wellbeing of mother and baby both (and for the family in general).

Knowing 'the risks' of csec is only 1/2--or maybe only 1/4--of the picture. True Informed Consent (under the law) means not only being told the benefits and risks of a particular procedure. It also includes being told the benefits and risks of OTHER OPTIONS, including the option of doing nothing. Women who are informed of the risks of csec (which I believe, as also true with epidural and various other common obstetrical interventions, are presented in a 'harmless' and quite watered-down way), are NOT being told why natural birth is best for all concerned in the vast majority of cases. Most docs do not even know the full range of benefits to natural birth, physically, emotionally, psychologically for mom and baby. The best we get from seemingly 'natural minded' obs is that they are willing to support the mom's wish for a certain 'experience' (so long as all goes well in the doc's mind). They do not acknowledge, and certainly do not promote, the facts which show that natural birth is hands down the very safest, healthiest way for babies to be born/women to give birth, in both the short and long term (for MOST women/babies, with exceptions, obviously).

So, to my way of thinking, this whole 'elective csec' is one of the most horrific of subversions handed to women in this technologically--and still very much patriarchally--oriented era. Separating out those women who do have good reason to choose csec (as with story of a pp), all others who--for no real health reason--seem to 'freely choose' elective csec, are being coerced by a deep and dangerous deception! There is simply no other way to put it.
They are NOT making truly informed choices--and the majority are not even aware of what Informed Consent under the law is and they surely do not know the myriad and deep benefits they are choosing against, by choosing csec.

They are women who have had their femininity stolen from them from the get-go, in the sense that they have been conditioned to believe that having a womanly body is something that can freely be 'bypassed' via patriarchal technologies, INSTEAD of being raised in an atmosphere that celebrates and honors woman's body and reality fully as a sacred and very much necessary element of this dualistic plane we inhabit. They are women who have been taught to believe they can 'bypass' their womanly body via technology, and not pay a price for that, now and on into their own and their children's lives--physically, emotionally, psychologically.

Yes, this is a feminist issue allright! It is very much a feminist issue.
MsBlack is offline  
#25 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 02:11 PM
 
Mrs-Mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 2,598
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlm194 View Post
In general "elective" c-sections are normalizing surgical birth. Your body is meant to pass a baby out of your vagina. Why is there even a push for elective c-sections? This blows my mind.

As the demand and push for elective c-sections go up (therefore normalizing it as a method of birth), it makes it more difficult for women to have a normal vaginal birth. And forget VBAC. Since c-sections are so common, women desiring a vaginal birth after a c-section are seen as radical. They are told they are putting themselves and their babies at risk. But major abdominal surgery is okay. Hmmm..... Go figure.
:

Wife to J, SAHM to W (03/06) ribboncesarean.gif at 32w4d, C (10/08) ribboncesarean.gif, and H (02/11) ribboncesarean.gif

Mrs-Mama is offline  
#26 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 02:44 PM
 
~Megan~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 15,295
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't think women are really informed by their doctors. All I was told when I had one (b/c of breech positioning) was that a c-section was safer. I was not told of any risks or common complications related to the c-section. I was, in fact, told I could have a vaginal birth next time and then right after it was done the OB told me it would be safer to do a repeat c-section next time.

Mom of a 7 yr old, 4 yr old, and 1 yr old. Wow. How did that happen?
~Megan~ is offline  
#27 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 02:57 PM
 
Ruthla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 47,607
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaLaLaLa View Post
An elective c-section is by no means right for everyone, and I made the decision the first time around that it was not right for me. But for my second pregnancy.... I wouldn't have had it any other way.


I think that very few women who choose elective c/s have put as much thought into it as you have. You had specific medical concerns about vaginal birth that applied to your own personal body, not a generic "I don't want my vagina to get stretched out" or "I'm afraid of labor pain."

Ruth, single mommy to Leah, 19 (in Israel for another school year), Hannah, 18 (commuting to college), and Jack, 12(homeschooled)
Ruthla is offline  
#28 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 03:06 PM
 
Mrs-Mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 2,598
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruthla View Post


I think that very few women who choose elective c/s have put as much thought into it as you have. You had specific medical concerns about vaginal birth that applied to your own personal body, not a generic "I don't want my vagina to get stretched out" or "I'm afraid of labor pain."
I agree with this.

Slightly : I also think that the term "elective c/s" is misleading in this case. There are truly elective c/s's, medically indicated c/s's, medically required c/s's (transverse breech, etc), and true emergency c/s's. As I will likely have a medically indicated c/s in the future (due to J-incision), it pains me to have that lumped in with "elective" since I would never elect a c/s if it weren't medically indicated (and I had done research to back up that medical indication).

Wife to J, SAHM to W (03/06) ribboncesarean.gif at 32w4d, C (10/08) ribboncesarean.gif, and H (02/11) ribboncesarean.gif

Mrs-Mama is offline  
#29 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 03:20 PM
 
Romana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I personally am not opposed to elective c/s (not the medical definition - I do mean purely elective, I don't want to birth vaginally non-medically indicated c/s). However, I am opposed to any situation in which a woman is not fully informed of her options and the risks and benefits of different procedures and has the opportunity to make an informed choice.

Part of the problem is that the current social communcations and understanding regarding vaginal birth is that it's scary, unpredictable, dangerous, painful, and otherwise very unpleasant. And its counterpoint is scheduled, elective c/s, which is generally presented and perceived as calm, safe, predictable, and easy (or at least, easier). That's not to say that everyone feels this way or communicates this, but the "big picture" that most first-time moms get is just that. I know I did. If I wasn't such a research junkie and felt compelled to learn everything I could, who knows - I might have been fighting for a non-medically indicated c/s. More and more FTM are.

With that kind of background color, information about natural birth - or even just vaginal birth - is pushing uphill. Under those circumstances, I feel that it should be more difficult to obtain an elective, non-medically indicated c/s than to obtain a NCB in a hospital. Instead, in my experience, the opposite is true.

Women seeking non-medically indicated elective c/s should be required to read and understand information pertaining to their choice. Women seeking NCB should be supported and while education is always important to success in NCB, I would set the bar lower.

There's more to this, though. There may come a time when it really is safer, statistically, to birth surgically than vaginally (at least for the baby - maybe not for mom, or maybe not for some time for mom). At that point, the question becomes deeply complex. Are there still other benefits to vaginal birth? Probably. Are they superior or do they justify the choice for vaginal birth?

One corner I do not want to be backed into as a birth education advocate and NCB supporter is the "Now, scheduled c/s has been proven in studies to be safer for babies than NCB. How can you justify encouraging NCB, or even allowing the option?" This is one reason why I really do support each woman's informed choice regarding the way she wants to birth. If she is ignorant and uninformed, I will not be able to respect her choice to birth surgically. And I will question (inwardly) her chance of success at NCB if she says she's "hoping for NCB" but knows nothing about it. Women have to take an active role in their care and in birthing long before labor starts if they are going to have a chance at birth experiences that are positive for them.

I know that, today, non-medically indicated c/s carries additional risk to both mom and baby, and potential long-term health complications that, IMO at least, outweigh the benefit of, say, avoiding the pain of a natural delivery (not to mention post-op pain with a c/s). However, I still recognize that a rational, informed mother may, for reasons that I may not fully understand, choose a non-medically indicated c/s. I support her right to do that, just as I support the right of women to have unassisted births. I may not understand her reasoning, but I believe patients should have a great deal of autonomy in regards to their care, and that absolutely extends to pregnant and birthing women. Ultimately, the woman should have the right to choose what is right for her and her baby, and she should be supported by HCPs in her decision.

And I think the bigger problem has absolutely nothing to do with non-medically indicated c/s by mother's request and absolutely everything to do with the kind of care provided. How many women are set up for a c/s from the beginning? I'm thinking of my co-worker's wife, who was told at her 8 wk appt that she was probably too small to give birth vaginally (she is completely normal-looking, just 5'2"). How many doctors say things like, "Well, he's estimated at 8.5 lbs already on the ultrasound, and that's an awfully big baby - and you're only 37 weeks. This baby could be 10 lbs by the time you deliver! If you want, we can just schedule a c/s for next week." It goes on and on. THAT is the erosion of patient autonomy. Even if after that you say "Oh and by the way <boilerplate boilerplate>" if you've gained a woman's trust and have already convinced her that she is going to need a c/s, or that it's the best thing to do, what real choice does she have? For the average woman, the average patient, the wiggle room to choose is practically nil at that point.

I think I'm repeating myself so I'll stop. But I don't think we can really blame the huge increase in c/s on women choosing non-medically indicated c/s, as media stories tend to. I think the bulk of that responsibility falls squarely on the shoulders of medical professionals who wield all the power in the doctor-patient relationship.

I would like to see all women better informed and more empowered. It's not an easy thing to do. And it wouldn't eliminate non-medically-indicated c/s, but that's not the point and it's not the goal, either.

Disclaimer: I made some generalizations above WRT how doctors/OBs approach patients. I feel that, as a generalization, it's rather accurate. That is not to say that there aren't great doctors out there, or non-c/s-happy OBs. I just do not think they are a large proportion of the whole. And I very strongly feel that few doctors really do a good job of ensuring patients are informed and aware of their options and risks/benefits of different procedures. A good deal of why that is is simple: they don't have the time.
Romana is offline  
#30 of 201 Old 01-09-2008, 03:25 PM
 
JavaFinch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: WI
Posts: 525
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
After paying almost $40,000 to GET pregnant without help from my insurance company, I am already bothered by the fact that others paying the same amount as I can have a child every year for a decade if they want and cost the insurance company $100,000's, but they won't even help an infertile couple have ONE child. So if they're also giving them free C-sections for all those pregnancies without ANY medical reason? No, I'm not cool with that.

I also just don't understand WHY someone would choose it??? I might have to have one due to previa and I will be SO disappointed if that happens. Obviously, my main fear is not having complications or bleeding from previa, but also on my mind is a c-section that I do NOT want! How can someone just choose that? I don't get it.
JavaFinch 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