Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here it says that the mere risk of law suits is one reason for the higher rate of c-sections in the US.
Litigation is a huge concern. Also hospital policies and insurance companies. Routine practices are also a factor, and what or how med students and residents are taught. For instance, SOGC (Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada) issued its own guidelines for certain breech presentations back in '09, which differs in ACOG's position that breech = automatic c-section. Truth is, most OB residents simply are not taught to assist in breech presentation, so they're just not offered as an option. Lack of trained birth attendants means lack of options.
There are still midwives that attend certain breech births, but guidelines have to be met first (not primiparas, "proven pelvis," complete or frank breech, presenting part low in the pelvis, etc.) Some "old school" doctors still attend these births, but very few. There's an OB in Atlanta, GA that patients travel from states away to have him attend their breech or twin birth. One of my midwives had attended several breech births in her 25 years of practice, but it's a case by case situation. A dear friend delivered triplets at 38 weeks, the first was born vaginal, and other two by c-section because one flipped transverse. Her birth team was prepared and highly trained (she had two previous homebirths).
Inductions, or certain methods, can account for the rise in c-sections. When an induction doesn't go as intended, mom or baby are unable to tolerate the contractions, body/baby wasn't ready, running out of time due to A/PROM and possible infection, the only real course of action, is a c-section. So, really, going in weighing the risks and benefits and the possible effects of various interventions (uterine stimulants leading to hyperactive contractions/uterine tetany and fetal distress, inducing without a favorable Bishop score increases the chances of complications, AROM and vaginal exams increasing the risk of infection, etc.) is how patients can make informed choices. And reviewing their options and resources, which hospitals approve of certain procedures, one's caregivers scope of practice, access to supportive caregivers, etc.
For instance, I had two babies that liked to flip between frank breech and vertex up to 35ish weeks, and while I'd have been comfortable with a vaginal breech birth with one of my previous midwives in attendance, as they had the skill and experience (and were confident I could deliver breech no problem), I wouldn't choose that option this time, because my care falls under a different provider and scope of practice. I doubt it would even be presented as an option. Even if a provider is comfortable or skilled in attending other births, the hospital they have privileges at may have restrictions due to, again, concerns of litigation. (this also applies to VBAC as well)
When it comes to weighing the risks and benefits, reviewing the outcomes, there are so many factors and variables. You can encourage patients to make the best, most informed decision, based on the information they have and what's available to them, for their particular situation.
I would have to study it a lot. As for one who has not studied it much or have kids. I would say C section. I don't care if I am judged. All the ladies that HAD to get one are not judged but if you elect (like I think I would) you may be judged and who cares. That is private.
If I become pregnant in the future I will do whatever I can to have an elective c-section. It is a very important choice for me. As it was said, it is a method for giving birth. I don't believe there is anything easy about childbirth, no matter how a baby is delivered. It is a huge deal. I believe a women should be able to choose what she knows is best for her body.
If I become pregnant in the future I will do whatever I can to have an elective c-section. It is a very important choice for me. As it was said, it is a method for giving birth. I don't believe there is anything easy about childbirth, no matter how a baby is delivered. It is a huge deal. I believe a women should be able to choose what she knows is best for her body.
OP this is old news, this was being said since the 80s when sections started becoming far more common.
Sections are better for fetal outcome, vag delivery is better for maternal outcome, generally speaking.
Some OBs are section "prone", Mothers were advised starting around the mid-90s to request a potential OB's section rate in precentages; the variability used to be pretty wide.
Mothers nowadays know better and are more in control of their birth plans and aware of things than during my childbearing years (80s-90s).
FWIW I've had 2 vag deliveries (one was a home birth) and 2 sections, one of those an attempted VBAC during which the OB was the one trying to push me to keep trying to deliver vaginally when I was insisting on a section; I was right, I ended up with a uterine rupture along the old surgical site
Last night there was a disturbing documentary on c-section vs natural birth on TV.
They said that it has become a kind of fashion in several countries, for instance in Brazil, where more than 80% of women have a c-section, without there being any need. It is the default there, especially among middle and upper-class people. Their private health insurance doesn't pay for a natural birth, which costs a lot more than a c-section.
Just like with white vs brown bread, it seems that ironically the poor are actually better off in that respect as statistics say that babies born via c-section are clearly more likely to suffer from health issues later on, specifically with regards to their immune and respiratory systems. They explained how the stress and pain of natural birth leads to lots of important, complex processes (neurotransmitters, hormones etc.) in the mother that carry over to the baby. Also, when the baby doesn't have to pass the internal organs of the mother during birth, the baby is not subjected to the mother's bacteria, which however is important for the baby's immune system.
They also said that when the percentage of c-section births goes above 40% in a given society, precious knowledge and experience concerning natural birth starts to get lost. In Brazil a lot of midwives no longer know how to react to certain problems during a natural birth, some start to panic. To young midwives natural birth is the exception and they don't really know how to deal with it.
They said that in China superstition plays a big role. Parents want their babies to be born on certain dates (especially those with an 8 in them), so they often opt for c-section because they want to prevent their babies from being born on unlucky dates.
Of course there are some medical issues where c-section makes total sense, but they are the exception, not the rule. It seems that the latest view among doctors is that women should have natural births whenever possible. They showed an experienced doctor who did some touch stimulation of the baby in the womb, which after about 10 minutes caused the baby to turn into the correct birth position all by itself.
It was this documentary:
[url=http://www.newdocs.de/c-section-controversy/]C-SECTION CONTROVERSY[/url]
Okay, thank you. I remember reading about the microbione concern too, but by 4-6 weeks of age, there is little difference in vaginally-born and cesarean-born babies
I had c-sections with all my kids due to a preexisting health condition. If I could have a choice, I would have had natural childbirth because the recovery time is usually much shorter and easier than having major surgery. C-sections are the easy way out? LOL yeah ok. @@
2 c-sections here. Definitely not "easy." The first baby likely wouldn't be here without it. The second was because the doctor was unwilling to risk a VBAC. Was it because of his risk of lawsuit or my risk of rupture? Probably both.
Was this documentary current? I was under the impression that, after a rise in the rate of c-sections, things were starting to swing back the other way.
Where are you seeing that it is some kind of elective or convenience thing? I see the rates have risen over 20 years. Perhaps that's because pre-natal testing has changed, and more potential issues can be predicted.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
