View Full Version : The Myths and Misconceptions that a site might accurately portray a womans option ha!
I just read an article on the Bub Hub 'Myths and Misconceptions about Caesareans' and was quite horrified at how biased it seemed. And then I go back into the forums and the link underneath the caesareans forum states 'Pregnancy Complications' whereas other birthing styles emblazon 'birth options'. Does anyone else find that a little unsettling?
I had a caesarean the first time round with my Son who is now 5 and have been contemplating baby #2 for quite some time now. What is holding me back is the 2nd caesarean.. so I came onto this site, amongst others to read up on articles and check out stories to reassure me or get the facts. Instead all I got was a whole heap of opinion based on biased facts.. Note in the article they list all of the things that can go wrong with a caesar.. what about all of the things that can go wrong with a Vaginal birth or a VBAC? Where were they listed? No where on that article of course.. that would be silly, might give woman an informed choice then...
I dont mind reading the things that can go wrong.. I just hate it when an article 'only' seems to be about that.. :ecomcity:
I've thought about what you said for a while. I agree, a caesarian is definately a birthing option, it has it's benefits for some women and those benefits should be listed, but I'm not sure if those benefits are medical if there is no medical reason for the c/s. But I think like any surgery, the risks involved must be outlined because it does have more risks than a successful vaginal birth and a vb isn't surgery. There are complications involved with vaginal births aswell, I agree, but those complications that arise usually end up with a c/s delivery, thus why it's commonly seen as a complication during labour perhaps?
I think any research you do, there won't be much support for an elective if there is no medical reason and a vaginal birth is and will always be the safest option because it's not surgery.
I think it's a duty of care to list complications of a surgery too, especially if it's elective, there really are no benefits to it for no medical reason.
As for a vbac vs an elective for a second c/s, there should be more risks and facts listed (if there isn't) because they are definately both options in this case so I agree there.
And then I go back into the forums and the link underneath the caesareans forum states 'Pregnancy Complications' whereas other birthing styles emblazon 'birth options'. Does anyone else find that a little unsettling?
I have been on this site and in the caesarean section (ha ha. Caesarean section. Get it?) so many times, and tonight was the first time I ever noticed that it says 'pregnancy complications' under the heading. Then I came in and saw this thread. Coincidence huh? I may be in the minority but I believe a woman should be able to elect to have a c-section for non medical reasons, and if you go to a private hospital you CAN elect to. So yeah, if we want to be nitpicky about it, I agree, it should probably say 'birth options/ pregnancy complications.' Not that it really matters. Like I said, I only just noticed it for the first time tonight.
I have to agree- it would be nice to see some positive articles about c sections. I am due to have my first baby in 3 weeks and due to my past medical history I have been told by my neurologist and haematologist that a VB could kill me or leave me severely impaired. However i had to meet 5 OB"s to find one to agree with a CS- i am a qualified NICU nurse and would never agree that a natural birth was the best option when it risked the health of mum or bub be it physical or psychological harm. Thankyou for recognising the bias that CS attract.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.