Here's an article about the surge in planned c-sections and inductions.
I can't imagine why anyone would plan a surgical birth. And more importantly, I am shocked that doctors do them, given that the risks are much greater than natural birth. Plus, are insurance companies PAYING for all thes unecessary c-sections and inductions?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I don't want to sell anything, buy anything, or process anything as a career. I don't want to sell anything bought or processed, or buy anything sold or processed, or process anything sold, bought, or processed, or repair anything sold, bought, or processed. You know, as a career, I don't want to do that.
About Me
Blogs I Like to Read
- Amy's Very Cool Homeschooling Family
- Ann Douglas
- Blogging Baby
- David Rhoden
- Domestic Psychology
- First Impressionist
- Jonathan Hickman
- Lemuria Books
- Mamas Ink
- Marrit Ingman
- Martini Made
- Meagan Francis
- Mo's Journal
- Remembering Ward
- Suburban Turmoil
- The Vol Abroad
- This Woman's Work
- Women's Health News
- Zygote Daddy
Good Stuff on Being a Parent/Family Life
Books I"ve written/contributed to
Blog Archive
-
▼
2005
(844)
-
▼
November
(62)
- republicans before lee atwater
- poem of the day
- creative people have more sex...
- early weaning in sub-sharan africa
- listening to today...
- elliot reads
- ouch
- celiac disease
- when the glass ceiling is at home
- parenting
- "AA - America's Stealth Religion"
- gay priests
- "I celebrated Thanksgiving in an old-fashioned way...
- for the girls
- mamasink
- Thanks Giving
- breastfeeding has significant impact on your risk ...
- breastfeeding isn't a lifestyle choice; it's a cri...
- Tennessee Valley Hunt
- Walk the Line
- the morning after pill
- Les raisons d'etre
- quote o' the afternoon
- the turkey baster
- i hope my obit is half as interesting...
- shopgirl
- Tim Lee Band
- dating down?
- when children attack
- the state of feminism today
- listening to today ...
- decisions, decisions
- baseball in knoxville?
- vanity
- breast and bottle
- are you self actualized?
- sondre lerche
- Last night, after getting RG sufficiently well fed...
- weisstronauts
- Speaking of breeders (below), you should buy this ...
- metrospirituality
- tilting at windmills
- makes elliot happy
- new pornographers
- so very, very wrong
- And today it's...
- Listening to today...
- sylvia
- a rant
- loss
- Currently listening to...
- home
- I'm a huge Johnny Cash fan and can't wait to see W...
- greek for me
- Here's an article about the surge in planned c-sec...
- Janeane Garafolo on Karl Rove:"The only interestin...
- interiors
- irony isn't pretty
- meet the breeders
- It's a Boy: Women Writers on Raising Sons
- NanoWriMo
- the halloween squash
-
▼
November
(62)
6 comments:
I just heard from an acquaintance whose wife is 18 weeks along. They cited the date of the scheduled birth. I didn't ask the reason -- perhaps there's a medical reason in their situation -- but it's a first baby, so the reason would not be prior C-section. I thought it was awfully unusual but I guess not.
I was 42 weeks when I had my only (so far). I learned after the (vaginal) birth that my doctor thought he would ultimately have to perform a C-section. But he let me labor on -- so long as the baby was fine and conditions were hopeful, I suppose. He's older -- in his mid-fifties -- so he may be "old school"). (And I should mention, also to his credit, that this was the middle of the night.)
I have another acquaintance who believes that having a C-section (even a necessary one) is a "failure" of labor. I think that's asinine. But there's a big distinction between procedures that are necessary and those that are just convenient.
you know people can blab all they want about people "taking control" and all that. and admitedly some people turn up who have just mind bogglingly ridiculous reasons for wanting a c section such as fear they will become "looser" or wanting to pick a certain birthday. BUT just a few days ago a friend of mine told me about the birth of her first grandchild which was difficult. the womans cervix almost did not open up. they did get their vaginal birth, but just barely. HOWEVER this woman is completely torn up inside and outside and has tears in her uterus. my first thought was she should have just had a c section as soon as they had a hint of trouble instead of trying to get that vaginal birth. because now, if she gets pregnant again, she will have a very real risk of uterine rupture. why. because doctors have been bullied by half informed women who want an "empowered" birth and will turn around and sue the doctor if they believe that the c section was unneccessary. I might add incidentally that this situation just further convinced me of the wrongness of home birth because there is absolutely no way until the woman was sitting there being prevented from pushing by her husband and a medical crew that they would have known there was even a problem. it could not have been foreseen. I shudder to think what could have happened if this had been a home birth.
so come on Dewi..dont you have anything to say about this? I dare you... or do you know I am right. and that perhaps "activists" who only see the goal of a reduced c section rate have actually caused doctors to hesitate to just go with the c section until it is absolutely a neccessity out of fear that their patients will get "informed" by "natural birth activists" such as yourself and turn around and sue them for the "unneccessary" c section. of course since they are medically untrained they do not realize that it was a judgement call and possibly a judgement call that saved them from an outcome no one could have predicted.how many people are walking around with fallout from births that would have gone better if everyone didnt have htat magic goal of a vaginal birth right up front and instead had as a goal the best possible outcome for mother and baby. people seem to forget that before surgical births and all that lovely medical intervention that you hate so much there was incredibly high maternal and fetal death rates. not to mention an incredibly high number of non fatal birth injuries and handicaps. and not immediately fatal damage to the mothers reproductive system that waited to blow up until the next birth when her uterus ruptured or something. the improvement in maternal and fetal health is not all just about good hygeine you know. I know you will say that I am pushing c sections but you know what, I think they are needed and sometimes not performed until the last minute because the doctor fears litigation. I know there are people who get c sections for ridiculous reasons and thats not what I am talking about. I am not talking about a doctor arranging a patients surgical birth so it wont fall on his golf day. I am talking about real medical need that people have been brainwashed into thinking is just some big bad male medical conspiracy. incidentally the tide has been turning about VBACs because people are finding out that some of the supposed "myths" about needing repeat cesarians werent such myths after all. a lot of these interventions may seem so "unnatural" to such a "natural" process as birth but lets not forget that in nature there is also a rather high rate of (in medicalese) unintended negative outcomes.
Wait, commenters...let's get back to the article. It sites a couple who wants their planned c-section so the birth is convenient for their work schedule. It sites a doctor who tends to perform c-sections because vaginal births take longer, and he doesn't have enough time to care for more than one noisy, empowered, birthing woman at a time. I think we need to change the model of care. If a woman's body is allowed to labor normally, supported physically and emotionally by patient, watchful caregivers, she will give birth to a healthy baby without damaging herself. A tiny fraction of women need the further assistance of modern obstetrics, and thank goodness that technology is available for that tiny percentage of women. But the vast majority of us--many feel as high as 98%--are very able to birth our babies.
I dont know its such a tiny fraction. just look at the death/disablement rates before the advent of modern medicine for a clue as to what birth looks like a lot of the time without intervention. I think that articles that are trying to steer people away from "interventions" deliberately use very bad examples so as to persuade people. I mean who would be persuaded to be outraged about c sections if they were told that most "unneccessary" c sections were simply judgement calls on the part of the doctor in the heat of the moment. better safe than sorry I really don think there are too many doctors out there who will operate on a patient just because the patient has some vain reason for wanting it. nor do I think many doctors will do a c section for thier own mere convenience however they most certainly will do one if they are anticipating a potential problem, the scope of which they may not know until it is past the point of making the decision.
you know I read this article and I find it hard to believe this doctor is for real and some anti interventionist reporter didnt just say a bunch of stuff out of context. I mean NINETY PER CENT..come on. of course she did mention that a percent of unneccessary c sections are a direct result of our lititgation happy society. of course a lot of medical students wont even consider obstetrics because of fear of lawsuits.
Post a Comment