Caesarean Ops

You're not old fashioned - you're wise and sensible!
I just heard this news this a.m. in the UK. I cannot think why this has become NICE policy. We still benefit from free health care in this country, (a wonderful facility), and surgery and 'assisted' births are available if required as it is. I cannot fathom why this system has changed.
It seems likely that surgical intervention will increase as a result of this - more's the pity. Sigh!
I'm so glad to be part of a movement of women becoming increasingly knowledgeable and able to talk sense!
wholewomanuk

This horrifies me, but so does the idea of artifical boobs and many other purely optional surgical procedures! You are very sensible, Amel. I think decisions like this are made by people who work in the area of risk management, and they only make decisions on what they can measure, which is intervention and what happens in their hospitals. It is nothing to do with the big picture of what is better for women. Has history not always worked like this for women?

A decision like this is about which way of birth will result in less cost to the health system in the longrun, as they measure it. How many women and babies will die or be damaged *in their system* by taking each of these options.

A woman birthing vaginally is not in full control of doctors and nurses. It is relying on a natural process, potentially being tampered with by doctors and nurses with surgical implements and a limited birthing environment. It has no schedule, and is often not completed in a single 8 hour shift.

They have full control of a CS birth, can schedule it and predict everything about it, including when it will happen and how long it will take. They have all the emergency facilities on hand to deal with it. It fits the hospital system, and it keeps birthing women inside the hospital system.

Maybe they are becoming more aware of the longer term effects of episiotomy and potiential for POP? In your dreams?

Women want self-determination. They want choice. They want 'what she had'. This decision is just another fruit of women's struggle.

All women will not choose CS. All women do not choose breast enhancement/reduction. Hopefully they will be fully informed about its risks. CS probably is safer than badly 'managed' vaginal birth in many hospitals in many countries. A scary thought. CS has probably become a lot safer, but it could also be that vaginal birth has become less safe.

Perhaps women have become less confident doing something natural when all around them in hospital birth units will doctors and nurses, trained to handle emergencies, wielding sparkling syringes, needles and scalpels, ready to pounce on any woman who falters on her journey through a natural labour.

It's not simple.

L

I heard this news report too, seems rather sad. I can't say I'm surprised, but I do think it may have come about because of demand from women, rather than the medical profession. I work with a group of much younger people, and hear a lot of conversations about childbirth and the consensus is always that a caesarean is a much better option than giving birth naturally and that you're lucky if you can persuade a doctor to allow it. I think the numbers of caesareans will increase enormously if women are offered the option as a right.
Tintagel

I am not against this at all. I think women should be allowed to birth however they choose, as long as they are given all the facts and not bullied into a birth choice, as I was. I do think, however, that if a c-section is not medically necessary, that the financial burden should be placed on the patient and not the government.

I wish I'd had another c-section instead of my horrible VBAC and uterine rupture and now prolapse. I am one of five sisters, and all of us have prolapse except for the one who has only had c-sections (she also has no incontinence at all after 4 children and 3 pregnancies - one pregnancy with twins). I am the only one who has had a c-section and a vaginal birth, and I am the only other one without incontinence. I really believe that a c-section would have kept me from having prolapse before menopause. I thought that vaginal birth was degrading, humiliating, and damaging. Vaginal birth may be empowering for some women, but others might not feel that way, and it should be their right to choose a different option.

Even knowing that many women who have not given birth vaginally develop prolapse anyway.....and even after learning something I didn't know before, which is that during a c-section they actually lift your uterus out of your body......

.......Although I'll never be able to know, I still blame my prolapses on my vaginal births. Two large babies, somewhat late in my life, episiotomies, and the first labor was so slow that at one point the doctor reached up and wrapped his arms around my entire stomach and PULLED as if he was trying to drag a stubborn boulder out of the ground (what he pulled out was a 10 lb. 4.5 ounce watermelon). If I could do it over, I'd have to consider c-section if I even suspected there was a better chance I might not be stuck with prolapse for the rest of my life.

"If I could do it over, I'd have to consider c-section if I even suspected there was a better chance I might not be stuck with prolapse for the rest of my life."

Hmmm... What if you suspected a better chance of hysterectomy following cesarean? Hysterectomy is performed in about 1 in 227 cesareans, and in about 1 in 5,000 vaginal births (for reasons of placenta acreta, atony, etc.). And since we all know that having our uteri is important to pelvic organ support ...
I'll not argue with Christina -- she and I have stated our opinions before with what I believe to be graciousness. However, I personally remain baffled by the thought that cesarean birth is, as a rule, *more* protective of pelvic organs than vaginal birth.

Not to pick on Christina either (sorry, Christina!), but what baffles me is why you continue to rave against the VBAC instead of the initial c-section that was the true cause of your uterine rupture and terrible vaginal birth? There also seems to be a bit of denial around your own potential to have birthed beautifully, powerfully, and healthfully if only you had been properly supported. You may have had an unfortunate experience, but you have let that shape your birth politics, seemingly without consideration of all the factors that led up to your experience.

The same with you, Surviving. It seems we have forgotten that vaginal birth is a natural function - where you are free to position your own body to deliver large babies out of the reach of doctor's arms and scalpels. Not all vaginal births are created equal.

Bad_mirror, I do agree that is a sobering statistic. I wonder what any of us would have chosen, if we'd had any idea about the odds of any of this. In a certain way, I'm glad I didn't have to be the one to make that call. In my case....my first was extremely large, the water sprung a leak ahead of time, and the labor was long. Many have expressed surprise that I was even allowed to deliver vaginally. Lord knows what kind of episiotomy they did on me after they finally pulled that kid out. If I know anything at all, I know there was some damage done that day. And Christine - I was offered no choices and as a first-time mother aged 39 with a baby that size, I wasn't about to second-guess the doctors in the middle of an un-medicated labor. By the time my second came along, they had revamped the birthing suites. But in 1988 it was as institutionalized as it comes.

First: I am so sorry for those of you that have had traumatic birth experiences. Birth baggage is some heavy sh*t.
Second: I'm all for the mother having options. But consider this, birth is not just about the mother. We have the baby to consider as well. The timing of this post is great. November is premature birth awareness month. If surgical birth was the very best, most healthful way for a baby to be born, don't you think the fetus would be created with a sharp pair of cutters inside to cut themselves right out at just the right time? We have forgotten that the baby has a wisdom to share and a part to play in his/her own birth.
Also, physiologically, there are many amazing things that happen when a baby is birthed vaginally (for the baby's health).

And just to throw this out there, c-sections are major abdominal surgery. Death, infection, incision pain, etc etc are all risk factors of c-section that occur in significantly greater numbers than during vaginal births. Also, statistically, babies born vaginally are a healthier lot.

Consider this: Every year, more than half a million babies are born too soon in the United States. Our country’s premature birth rate has risen by 36 percent over the last 25 years (gee I wonder why). That’s serious cause for concern.
Premature birth costs society more than $26 billion a year and takes a high toll on families. Babies born just a few weeks early are at risk of severe health problems and lifelong disabilities.
Premature birth IS THE NUMBER 1 KILLER OF NEWBORNS.

This is from an article I read today with some information from the March of Dimes, an organization dedicated to helping moms have full-term pregnancies and researching the problems that threaten the health of babies.
Across the nation our premature birth rates are increasing.
"Donna Pointer, program coordinator of the March of Dimes of Central Florida, said that more women are electing to give birth before they are full term at 40 weeks. “The last three to four weeks of pregnancy, there’s still so much development,” she said. “Unless there is a medical reason for that, we should never schedule an induction of labor or C-section prior to 39 weeks.”
Dr. Anthony Gregg, professor and director of maternal-fetal medicine division at the University of Florida College Of Medicine, said scheduling an induction tends to be a matter of convenience."

See the thing is, as much as we wish it was a science, birth is an art. Yes, the average gestation is 40 weeks. You know what that means right? That many births go to 44 weeks. Some babes need to cook longer than others. Sometimes a woman will ovulate and the baby will get made many days after and then implant even longer after that- so by the calender the baby actually looks older than he/she really is.

Third: Consider that during a birth it is not just the baby that is born. The mother is also born. Talk to any mom about her birth and you will understand that the circumstances of our birthing influence our mothering for better or worse. When a mom births her child, as intended, with the strength of her own body, the chemical cocktail she experiences is designed by our biology to create a bond with the baby. A strong bond. When a mom experiences the power she and only she has to birth her child into this world, safely, and with wisdom, you will never ever be able to take that away from her.
And we want to give this up? We want to allow women to deliver early, for convenience, on a schedule? What the heck is wrong with us? We are so disconnected from ourselves it is tragic.
Medically necessary c-sections are the only surgical birth I can respect.
I love all of you women. I respect that many may not share my opinion. Please get the facts. Surgical births are by far inferior to vaginal births in safety for the mom and the baby.

It's just good to step out of our own experience a bit and try to see the modern state of women's health care for what it is. Hysterectomy for prolapse? Cesareans to prevent prolapse? Plastic slings for SUI? Botox for urge incontinence? For Pete's sake, gynecology does not even have the core anatomy of the female body right! It's difficult to see women form strong opinions when they are like fish who cannot see the water they swim in.

Christinabf,
Your birth was humiliating and degrading. This saddens me. I can not stand this for you. I wish I had been there with you, to hold the birthing space sacred for you. I wish you had been here with me to see how it can be.
What a vast amount of suffering you have experienced in the hands of others for first one reason and then another.
I am grateful you are alive today and thankful for the medical interventions you experienced that saved your life.

Surviving60- I'll tell you one thing I know, sometimes those big babies come slow for good reason. This gives them time to allow the head to mold- the skull bones to push over each other to make the head smaller. Also, big babies often have trouble regulating things like blood sugar, temperature, breathing etc- I think a slow birth helps these babies get it sorted out a little better so they are more successful on the outside.
I know 3 women right of the top of my head who had a baby over 11lbs at home with no issues- not even a tear! We are made to do this! Your body is amazing.

and I'm just a swimmin around passin out goggles ;)

A-men!!

Christina, I am so sorry you have had these horrible experiences. Who knows how it could have been different, had you or others made different decisions? Who knows if you would have developed prolapses had you birthed well vaginally or whether any of your sisters will develop prolapse after menopause? Time will tell.

BTW, I don't think they always lift the uterus out of the abdomen during CS. I have watched a few CS videos, and have never seen it done.

Louise

I'm a little insulted by this comment.

My initial c-section WAS medically necessary: I was overdue, I had no fluid left, my baby was frank breech, and I was in early labor. The doctor offered to try to turn the baby manually for me, but told me that I would need medication to stop my contractions to even attempt a version, and without any fluid, there was not a good chance that it would even work. I was tortured all day with labor pains and anxiety about surgery, but I had to wait 8 hours for my c-section because I had eaten breakfast that morning, thinking I was just going to the hospital for some tests. All day long my doula made me feel like a loser for "deciding" to have a c-section. However, I was with my baby an hour after she was born, and despite what everyone believes about separation from c-section, she and I bonded immediately and she nursed right away. I nursed her until she was three. I wore her in a sling or carrier until she was two. Our relationship is amazing, despite the c-section. And I had no physical issues from this c-section.

With my second baby, I was rather bullied by my midwife to VBAC. After 24 hours of labor, I was separated from my baby for several hours because I was in surgery. I couldn't nurse her because I was too drugged to hold her and then because of the numerous things I was being injected with. I was in the hospital for five days. I couldn't wear her because of the pain, then because of the prolapse - it just irritated my pelvic region too much. It was a very different experience, and much worse than my c-section.

Another thing I can say is that if I had ruptured just a few moments before I actually did, my baby could have died. If I had tried a home birth, I would have died. A c-section would have saved me from recurring nightmares, pelvic trauma, and prolapse (there is no doubt in my mind that I would not have prolapse now if not for my vaginal delivery). It would have saved me thousands of dollars on therapy to work through my post-traumatic stress.

Excuse me for failing to see my own "potential". Since I can't have any more children, I guess I'll never know how I could have birthed. Maybe my experience has shaped my birth politics, but only because I HAVE considered all the factors that led up to my experience. I can clearly see how the hospital system failed me, and I know from experience that women are treated better, paid more attention to, etc., when they have a c-section.

I'm not telling anyone how to birth. I am voicing my opinion based on my experiences, and it is condescending to basically state that my opinion is not valid because it is based solely on my experiences. I also find it insensitive to say that I'm in denial about my potential when there is no chance of that potential to be realized.

People should be permitted to birth however they want to, as long as their decision is an informed one.

Just wondering the age of those c/s videos? (also, it is done after the babe is removed -- was this "closing" included? just curious as sometimes filming stops after the birth) I think keeping the uterus inside is an older technique. I have seen about 20 surgeries in two facilities, all with external exposure of the uterus, done by 4-5 different practitioners. A poll of my nursing friends who have been to other facilities say the same. One said he saw the OB keep the uterus in, but that the OB was "old school." So it could be a regional thing (maybe this is only done in the Western US) or an evolutionary technique now used to better assess repair. I'll try to find out.

Yes, that would be great, Bad_mirror, if you could find out. Why would they remove the uterus?

There seems to be so much mystery still, about what really happens below the level of the green drape, and about what is actually done during pelvic repair surgery. Why don't these women know what was done to them? It is as if it is none of the woman's business, that it is only secret doctor-god business.

Christina, you seem to have a pretty good handle on what happened to you, and why decisions were made as they were.

I am sorry to have hurt your feelings, Christina. I’m not sure why you ignite this argument every few months. And forgive me, but it does seem like you continue to deny that your c-section, however medically warranted, was the true cause of your uterine rupture.

How wonderful that you bonded so well with your daughter. I hope you are also able to consider the large body of evidence suggesting some percentage of mothers and children do suffer loss of primary connection through surgical birth. I agree that VBAC is risky and you were wise to birth in a hospital setting, even if the setting itself might have increased the chances of rupture. There are no easy answers with cesarean and many factors that can never be known, including the potential of your VBAC to have been better managed (I think you misconstrued my words about “potential”).

Cesarean birth is not just about mothers. Like the right to life, this argument must include the child being surgically removed from his mother’s uterus as well as the society into which he is being born.

I apologize for the brevity of this post -- bedtime for 3yo and 3 month old! Google exteriorizing uterus after cesarean. Or exteriorizing uterine repair versus in in situ uterine repair. Tons of stuff! Exteriorization is used extensively in North America because it is believed to shorten surgical time, blood loss, and the need for sutures. It is considered "good" for post surgical outcomes (!).

I don't mean to do this. Every now and then when I check out WW I come across something about c-sections as a current forum topic. I can't help but give my opinion about it. It happens to be a hot topic for a lot of people, myself included. I still suffer from pelvic pain due to extensive internal and external scar tissue from my delivery, in addition to my prolapse, so I have daily reminders of my decision.

I think that repeat c-sections should be excluded from any argument about c-sections in general, especially if we are to talk about the risks to baby. An unsuccessful VBAC resulting in uterine rupture has the potential to be devastating, and a repeat c-section is probably safer.

I did not go into my first delivery via c-section lightly. Unfortunately, I had not done any research about it since I hadn't even considered that I would need one. I even hired a doula for support, thinking my whole pregnancy that I would do my best to avoid surgery. I was really scared when I found out that I had to have a c-section, and only truly stopped holding my breath once my baby was out of me and I heard her cry.

I think most women are afraid of c-sections and want a vaginal birth. I don't think that more women will necessarily choose surgical birth because it is offered to them. I do think, though, that women should be fully informed of their choices and the associated risks. When I look back, I think of how foolish it was to assume that doctors and midwives knew everything and were telling me everything.

I think I will avoid commenting on the topic of c-sections in the future.

I feel sad reading through all these comments. But these arguments come up all the time through the internet and media in general and it is always an argument between women.

I don't think there is any black or white answer when it comes to the best way to birth, or indeed the causes of prolapse for each individual.

Giving birth might be natural, but that doesn't make it safe. Women who do not have the option of a caesarean are , in my opinion, disadvantaged. There are significant risks for both mother and baby with vaginal delivery.

All pregnancies change our body in some way; it is never the same afterwards. Who can tell which way is best for each particular mother and baby?

I thought this report from the BBC was measured and said a lot: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15106523

I'm just thankful we live in current day, developed countries where there is a good survival rate for new mothers and their babies. It wasn't always so, and still isn't across the developing world.

Hi Christina

I don't think you have caused anyone any offense. I hope not, anyway. However, I can hear that it is an emotionally 'disturbing' issue for you, and it might be good for you to not get involved in these discussions, as there are never any clear cut winners; and it once again it brings back the pain from scars of decisions made long ago, in different circumstances.

What you are saying bears out the philosophy of Wholewoman, to avoid surgical interventions to our reproductive and sexual organs, where possible. It also bears out our philosophy of doing thorough research for ourselves before committing your body to being cut and stitched by anybody. We need to make these decisions ourselves when they are not life-threatening, and will full information available. There are always repercussions from cutting and suturing, sometimes lifesaving, sometimes negligible, sometimes major, especially when other subsequent events exacerbate it.

If anything good has come out of your uncovering your scars for us it has been for you to express a story that all young women can now read, and learn from. "Oh good, I can have a CS!" becomes a little less frivolous. Hopefully somebody in the same position as you all those years ago, will read your story, and question carefully the need for a CS before agreeing to it, or a VBAC, for that matter.

We have to make some assumptions in this crazy world of ours, or we would never set foot outside our own front doors. I can hear you blaming yourself for causing this cascade of negative results, in spite of having your lovely, live children, and being able to have them grow up with you. If this is the case, I would like you to try and rethink that self blame, and place it where it belongs, in the hands of those who ill-advised you at different points.

Please forgive yourself for being young and innocent. Just enjoy your children. Life does leave scars on all of us, whether physical, mental, social or emotional. To not have any scars, or to have them and be unaware of the effect they have had on us is to not be fully human.

We all have scars. Having a few, and taking them out and examining them occasionally, and showing them to other, particularly younger, people may help them to learn from ours, and avoid the same wounds as they go through life .

Some have many scars. This is either a sign of being very old , or very clumsy, or a very slow learner.

Some have no scars. This is a sign that they are either very, very young, or have been cosseted by a heavily scarred parent and have not reached autonomy, or they are a robot.

Welcome to life, as it is. If we can't make sense of these puzzling discussions here, then where can we make sense of them?

Louise

We come to this site from all different countries with different customs and medical systems; all different ages and walks of life, with all different family histories and life experiences. No one has a right to second-guess the birthing choices of anyone else. We all did it differently, and here we are, all of us with prolapse!

There is no grey area here. Medically necessary surgery is lifesaving!
Cesarean birth is major surgery, and, as with other surgical procedures, risks are involved. The estimated risk of a woman dying after a cesarean birth is less than one in 2,500. The risk of death after a vaginal birth is less than one in 10,000.
and this is just the risk of death. There are many many other risks to the mother and baby.
There is a clear 'loser' here and that is the baby. The baby looses.

Christinabf, I don't see you igniting an argument at all. You honestly responded to an interesting topic with your thoughts. Seems good to me. Others are doing the same. You have been very kind and polite and shared a terrible experience with all of us. I want to honor you and your experience. You are strong and brave to share this, your birth story.

Statistically speaking, VBAC is much much safer than repeat c-section.
I know you had a terrible experience. It's very hard to understand why this happened to you. You are one of the real life cases that these statistics are complied around. For every one of you though, there are multiple more on the other side. Women just like you, who had bad outcomes from a repeat c-section. Women who did not survive the surgery. Almost 4 times as frequently women die during a c-section compared to vaginal birth deaths. That is significant. That's what statistics are. They give us a mathematical understanding of the risk to benefit ratio.
I know you have been in therapy for your birth injury. I want to suggest you find a local ICAN group and process your birth with some other moms who have been there and done that. Your trauma is the tip of the iceberg. You will not be disappointed in the compassion you will find in that group.

For many women, believing that what was done to them saved them and the baby is completely necessary to maintaining mental health. I understand this. What happens when you realize your surgical birth was completely unnecessary? When you find out they could have done an amnio-infusion, or that the baby was never in distress or that had the labor been allowed to progress the breach position would have resolved during the labor? What happens then? Better not to go there right?

I will never agree with women opting for c-section out of convenience. Medically necessary c-sections are worth the risk to mother and baby. All other reasons for c-section (including the mom's fear of giving birth, her desire to keep her vagina virginal, etc) are invalid and put the mother and baby at great risk. This mandate by the UK is not responsible. It's shameful. But they sure will make more money off of it.

Maybe I’m the defensive one here, but I come from a place of having looked deeply into the male take-over of women’s health, of which cesarean-on-demand and routine hysterectomy are the end result.

Where is our compass?

Here is an example of why it might not point to obstetrics, gynecology, anthropology or orthopedics. The following are a few quotes from a widely-published obstetrician/anthropologist named Maurice Abitbol who has been extremely influential in making cesarean a common birth practice in the modern world.

“The whole orthostatics and orthodynamics of the mammalian body became altered when the trunk rotated 90 degrees around the hip joint and the pelvis had to support the whole trunk.”

This view is simply wrong. The reality that the pelvis did not rotate around the hip joints, but that a profound lumbar curvature allowed us to become upright while maintaining a horizontal pelvis is the basis of the Whole Woman work.

“As a practicing obstetrician, I can definitely state that the relationship between the narrow human pelvis and the enlarged fetal head is disproportional or at least a tight fit.”

Midwives who have treated thousands of women marvel at the unfailing ability of the maternal pelvis and fetal head to expand/contract with the human birth process.

“Human intervention can either ‘ease’ obstetric demands on the pelvis or completely bypass them, and this can make obstetric demands less imposing from an evolutionary point of view.”

We are now 7 billion strong. Where are the imposing obstetric demands? Genetics and behavior are tightly bonded. The routine surgical birth of a large percentage of the population has meant and will continue to mean *greater* imposition on our continued evolution, a reality that is being closely studied.

“Because of the backward position of the trunk in relation to the pelvic girdle, the glutei lose some of their abductor function and the pregnant patient at term now wobbles, as previously described. The elegant striding walk, the pride of human erect behavior, is all but gone in advanced pregnancy.”

Would you allow this man to even touch your pregnant body/mind/spirit? A misogynistic thread is tightly woven throughout women’s “health” care.

“My personal impression is that, as previously mentioned, the human body has more or less adapted to erect posture and locomotion, and has modified its anatomy accordingly. However, the body of the female human has not entirely adapted to parturition. Parturition, rather, suffers somehow from the anatomic modifications resulting from erect posture. Pregnancy, labor, and delivery are meant to be carried more by a quadrupedal than a bipedal body. If it were not for progressive interference of Homo sapiens with its own birth process (labor and delivery attendance, primitive then modern midwifery, assisted and directed labor, oxytocin stimulation, cesarean section, for example) the survival of the human species would have been difficult.”

My grandmother birthed 8 children at home by herself next to the kitchen stove, as did most pioneer women.

True north points to the high level of stability of the human female body to stride elegantly, birth naturally, and recover from prolapse. For whatever reason, OBGYN has wanted to degrade and discount this powerful reality. Perhaps because both the birth process and prolapse scared and disgusted men. Regardless, they responded to both with scalpels. Women eventually became fodder for a huge and powerful machine that to this day bases its practices upon misconceptions Abitbol’s words so aptly express.

This is why it is difficult to hear a woman say that her hysterectomy or c-section was great and more women should have them.

I watched an interview on this subject with a spokeswoman from the British Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

Interestingly, the main issue she talked about was cost. Not many women in the UK have their babies on private health insurance - our health service is free and taxpayer funded. We have a chronic shortage of midwives and healthcare trusts that can't afford to recruit even when there is under-staffing. The result? Lots of recent scandals about avoidable deaths in our maternity units - and in many areas, forget it if you want the NHS to provide slow and gentle home births staffed by patient midwives who can only attend to one labouring woman - because she's in your house. Non NHS independent midwives are just for the very rich because they have to pay such huge professional insurance premiums and even if you have health insurance
( which most of us don't) most policies won't pay for them.

This leading obstetrician argued that quick, efficient, planned caesarians cost the health service less, and required fewer practitioner hours than long, unpredictable labours. Particularly when units can get a production line of c-sections going and discharge women home the same day. Does anyone's blood run cold at that? Discharge home the same day after such major surgery? Fewer hospital hours for the NHS to pay for but I know so many women who were given blood transfusions or needed drips after the procedure - not to mention two whose wounds burst open.

There seems to be an irony here. Are unnecessary caesarians promoted in the US because of the profit factor for doctors, and in the UK ( on a cheap, cheerful and perhaps corner -cutting basis) because we just can't afford proper midwife care and to allow for long, natural, unpredictable births any more? Money is behind both groups of professionals promoting c-sections. I have more respect for the British who at least admit they need to balance the books in a public healthcare system, but lets not pretend this is about women's health or women's choices.

Doubtful

Yes, the thought of same day discharge after CS does make my blood run cold. With this change in policy I wonder how long it will be until women having babies under the NHS will be 'sold' the idea of a planned CS as a 'cost management' measure?

An even scarier, more left-field thought is that women might even be given incentives to have a CS! An incentive might be as simple as changing the rules so that women birthing vaginally may get less services in the postpartum period, ie they could load the vaginal births negatively, so the CS incentive would cost them less than status quo, rather than the incentive being an extra cost to be accommodated.

Geez! Perhaps I should be working for the NHS? I can be such a bitch to other women! It is horrible, just horrible.

There's a WholeWoman UK? Excellent.

The new policy is total b*llocks, and I completely agree its in order to increase efficiency.

However, it runs contrary to my experience with my last baby, which I had at home with a wonderful team of midwives who are actively supported by the NHS Hospital in the area in promoting home births for women with straightforward pregnancies who want them. I had the 'ideal' type of midwife led care 100% on the NHS and I can tell you it is wonderful!

Shame women in other areas are not so lucky. I am constantly amazed at how women are prepared to give up on their bodies when it comes to having babies, but I believe it is consistent with how we are raised in the West - womanly things are 'girly' and not in a good way and it it therefore much more acceptable to go for the so called 'medically proven' (read: male) approach and not believe in all that 'womanly mumbo jumbo'. Making c-sections freely available gives weight to the popular perception that normal birth is unnatural, unsafe, terrifying and best avoided and this is hardly helpful to the emotional and physical health of women and their babies (not to mention the men that have to deal with hysterical women who, as a result of such perceptions have no hope of having a positive natural birth experience).

I always thought I was a feminist, but my 'feminism' has changed so much since having children and all the challenges that have come my way since. I always thought being a feminist was about cutting it in a man's world. Now I realise it should actually be about maintaining our femininity, rediscovering all that womanly wisdom and being respected for it.

Christine - have just read again this Abitbol lunatic's comments which you included in your earlier post. They make my blood boil!! Particularly the snide comments about a woman's gait in advanced pregnancy - any animal on 4 legs ceases to be graceful and elegant in the final stages of pregnancy. What a moron.

And the argument about human babies being too big for their mothers is just illogical to me. Of course, there are going to be some babies that for whatever reason (such as the shape of the mother's pelvis - very unusual) are going to have problems being born vaginally, but to state that IN GENERAL evolution has failed our species and that medical intervention is the only way the species can survive just makes no sense. The 'top class' obgyn I initially saw about my lapse said basically the same thing (you walk on 2 legs and therefore you're fundamentally flawed in terms of reproduction). It's scandelous. Really, it is.

I am very petite and birthed a 8 pound 4 baby with a large head no problem. But then again I didn't have misogynistic idiots mascerading and health professionals filling my head with this sort of defeatest nonsense right before I went into labour. (thanks once again Ina May Gaskin).

havent read all the posts here yet, just the first few
y'all know I love natural homebirth
but in some cases (forget the number I read, thinking its 10-15% as per WHO), c/s are actually medically necessary. to save the life of the baby and/or the mother. and in those instances, we have nothing to talk about other than to give thanks that human beings have the ability to save lives with a scalpel. from her description, sounds to me like christinabf's initial c/s was not in the same category as a woman choosing a c/s so she could have the baby before thanksgiving or in hopes of keeping her bottom scar-free.
I really believe that women deserve full information and power over their choices, and I find it dishonest to tell women that a c/s is just as good for mother and baby as natural well supported birth.
but if a mother allowed a dr to guide her into a c/s based on the premise that she or her child would be severely injured in vaginal delivery, she still deserves a treasured birth experience, and in my mind that means she needs to be allowed to believe that she did the best thing for her child. because she did.
I think it is imperative that any conversation about c-section needs to be clear about which cases it is about. same as homebirth, when hearing about my hb's most people first ask about the mess and then "what if {insert horrible scenario here} ? forgetting that most mw's do select their hb mothers. if I was carrying twins, one breech and had preeclampsia, no way would I attempt hb! so quit saying how dangerous it could be. same with c/s, if you're gonna die without it, lets quit saying how irresponsible it is.
those outlying cases aside, now we can talk about the problem of pressuring low risk mothers into 'convenient' surgery with real life-threatening potential side effects.

Oh Cyncial, I could not agree with your more.

Packing in a few life experiences, including being raised in the sixties and being allowed to choose whatever career I chose, and having higher education institutions accept women into all Courses of study, I had a very 1960's view of feminism.

This Cynical Old Tart (one of my other aliases) was a real earth mother with her babies and children, and gave them the same guidance as my parents about choosing careers. I never did go along with the idea that women should do everything that men did. (Why would we want to?). I never did believe in 40 hours of childcare per week as a wise way of raising kids, and my kids never wanted to go back to child care after the first visit, anyway, so that was a no-brainer.

However, since menopause, I seriously think world leaders would be better off, and the planet would be better off, if they let their feminine side off the hook. I believe much more than ever before in the power of the feminine, and have become militantly against the male takeover of women's health and the birth of new humans, and the way women's issues about their health get swept under the carpet by taboo, corporate and government greed and legislation.

I have become much more interested in social history, why things are like they are, and the way we have made history happen as a species. I have become much more 'big picture' in my view of the world.

It is as if menopause has changed the way I think about the world around me. Perhaps lower oestrogen levels literally have given this old witch a more objective view of the world than I had as a reproductive woman?

Louise

"I always thought being a feminist was about cutting it in a man's world. Now I realise it should actually be about maintaining our femininity, rediscovering all that womanly wisdom and being respected for it"