[*~*SewHappyNow*~*]

I was given this magazine from my midwive's office and figured I'd thumb through to see what mainstream garbage it had to offer.

There is an article on elective c-sections and what the real risks are.

They left out almost all the risks! Especially for the child. All that was said was a quote from Dr. Mozurkewich who said the risks to the child are few and rare

Of course they went into great depth about the risks of vaginal birth which included possible incontinence later in life and the inability to schedule one's delivery and maternity leave! OMG

GMAFB

There was no mention of infant mortality or mortality of the mother in vaginal vs c-section births.

Absolutely appalling.. how are mothers supposed to make informed choices reading garbage like this? I sent a letter to the editor and I think I will be mentioning the article to my midwife... I'd be embarrassed to hand out this magazine to my clients.

http://epregnancy.com/current_issue/article_a.html

I don't think you can read the entire article online, but if you want to send a letter to the editor the ady is [email protected]

 

[Electra375]

And they fail to leave out that more than 3 c/s is not recommended due to the possiblity of uterine rupture with subsequent pregnancies. So mamas who want large families -- be ware. They also fail to mention that the surgical standard of a double layer suture is being phased out to a single layer making a VBAC more risky in terms of uterine rupture in the future. Thus the reasoning behind the proposed new standard of no VBACs.

And you really have to search for this info. I have it all if someone what's to PM me for the books it's in.

Forever a homebirther after my first two were unneccessary c/s.

 

[applejuice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Electra375 Forever a homebirther after my first two were unneccessary c/s.

Congratulations Electra375! Good for you! A major accomplishment!

The article said that many female obstetricians were intrigued by the trend.

How very sad. I can recall 20-30 years ago when it was believed that more women in medicine might make childbirth more humane and less surgical...
...what has really transpired is women have proven to be the pelvic pirates that male ob/gyns have always been and sometimes more so to be able to prove themselves to the good old boy hierarchy of modern medicine.

Furthermore, allowing midwives on the obstetrical teams has spawned a small but growing group of "medwives" in the hospitals.

Where will it ever end?

 

[Mamid]

It won't, that's just it.

Docs are scared of lawsuits, so the only way to prevent it is to section. No judge will rule against a doc doing a section. So that way they're safe.

:

 

[Tiskin]

you are right, this is absolutly APALLING!!

 

[CortLong]

Grrrrr! That makes me sick.

 

[applejuice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mamid It won't, that's just it. Docs are scared of lawsuits, so the only way to prevent it is to section. No judge will rule against a doc doing a section. So that way they're safe. :

Actually doctors have been sued and sued successfully over the years for doing caesarean sections. In more recent years, it has become more difficult. Caesareans have become the standard of care.

In CA, in Ventura County, there was a doctor sued for doing a frivolous caesarean section on a primip because he would miss his golf game - this is the truth, honest. The basis for the suit was that the surgery unnecessarily complicated her future reproductive life, and this was therefore her damages.

She lost.

I suspect in today's litigious climate, a doctor would be sued for not doing a caesarean early enough.

 

[PapayaVagina]

I can't stand that magazine

They send it to me all the time and it immediately goes into my recycling.

 

[Tiskin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by applejuice In CA, in Ventura County, there was a doctor sued for doing a frivolous caesarean section on a primip because he would miss his golf game - this is the truth, honest.

Ugh! This makes me sad and nauseaus.