[genoisegurl]

Just thought I would post this for those who are intrerested in reading:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20060817...lltimehighinus

 

[genoisegurl]

I was wondering what exactly has the "federal health officials" done to try to reduce the % of c-secs by 50%?

 

[chandasz]

They certainly aren't promoting research-based medicine! UGH

I love how they try to blame a part of this on "women are asking for this". I'd like to know how many women would TRULY choose an elective (non-medically indicated) c-section if they knew the real risks.

If federal health officials wanted to do something worthwhile, they'd require OBs and midwives to learn vaginal breech delivery!

 

[October16Mom]

One word. Malpractice. I'd like to see a study comparing rates of C-sections to cost of malpractice in the state. Docs are terrified of malpractice, and in some states it has gotten outrageous. For instance, in West Virginia you lose your malpractice when you are named in two lawsuits. That doesn't mean that the person has to win, just that they bring a suit. If you put yourself in a doctor's shoes and think about losing your job if you have a bad outcome, you can understand why they do a section if there is even a hint of fetal distress, etc. Sadly, more lawsuits are filed over NOT doing a section when the baby had an issue than doing one.

So, maybe when states start putting caps on lawsuits and people start suing doctors for doing unecessary sections, the section rate will decline. Just sharing my opinion for whatever it's worth.

 

[Ahappymel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by genoisegurl I was wondering what exactly has the "federal health officials" done to try to reduce the % of c-secs by 50%?

My DH always says that "TRY is a LIE"

 

[maxmama]

Quote:

Originally Posted by October16Mom One word. Malpractice. I'd like to see a study comparing rates of C-sections to cost of malpractice in the state. Docs are terrified of malpractice, and in some states it has gotten outrageous. For instance, in West Virginia you lose your malpractice when you are named in two lawsuits. That doesn't mean that the person has to win, just that they bring a suit. If you put yourself in a doctor's shoes and think about losing your job if you have a bad outcome, you can understand why they do a section if there is even a hint of fetal distress, etc. Sadly, more lawsuits are filed over NOT doing a section when the baby had an issue than doing one. So, maybe when states start putting caps on lawsuits and people start suing doctors for doing unecessary sections, the section rate will decline. Just sharing my opinion for whatever it's worth.

First thing you learn working in OB is that the only section you'll be sued for is the one you didn't do.

People have unrealistic expectations of perfect outcome, and when it's not, they look for a scapegoat.

 

[xmysticprincessx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chandasz If federal health officials wanted to do something worthwhile, they'd require OBs and midwives to learn vaginal breech delivery!

or encourage more women with breech babies to see a chiro who is trained in the webster technique. i'm only 21 weeks, but i'm a bit nervious (which i shouldnt be) because the baby is slightly breech. (i was a breech baby, and i was a c-section. i'm 25.) i'm kinda pissed that my insurance company won't cover a chiro. how many women out there have insurance that wont cover a chiro and cant afford it and/or have a dr who does not believe in chiros and will have a c-section because of a breech baby instead of trying to flip the baby?

there's also probably some older drs who are set in their ways that if a woman has a c-section once, she will have a c-section for the rest of her babies. (thats how it was in the 80s for my mom.) and one of the drs my MW works under gave her a hard time about backing her up on a VBAC. (this mama ended up switching to a different MW whose dr wouldnt give her a hard time.)