Interesting article about c/secs!

[stellarella]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/...e#contentSwap2

[AM]

Just coming to post this

QUOTE:

At that meeting, convened by NSW Health, officials presented a nightmare scenario: based on current trends a rise in the number of caesarean sections from 30 to 39 per cent of births would mean more than 1000 extra operations a year, diverting resources from other services.
Compare that with the 1970s, when the rate of caesarean sections was about 5 per cent.
By the 1980s caesareans made up about 10 to 15 per cent of all births.
But then came a dangerous combination: medical advances made anaesthesia safer as society moved towards the quick, clean and convenient over the potentially long, drawn out and messy. The result: a significant shift towards elective caesarean sections. The rate reached 19 per cent in 1994, 27 per cent in 2002 and 28.5 per cent in 2003. Now it makes up nearly one-third of all births.

William Walters has been delivering babies for more than 40 years. Based at the Royal Hospital for Women in Randwick, he says it is vital the number of elective caesareans is reduced.
"There is ongoing discussions looking at how normal birth can be encouraged with the view to reducing the rate of caesarean sections, because there are more complications from caesareans - some that even result in maternal death - and clearly we must do everything we can to prevent those."

The secretary of the NSW Midwives Association, Hannah Dahlen, says women have been conned into thinking that caesarean deliveries are safer for babies. "That is a myth. At the rate of caesareans we have now, we are creating problems for both mums and babies. We have tipped the balance: we know there is a certain level of caesarean sections that improves our maternal and baby mortality rate, maybe around 15 per cent, but developed countries are starting to see maternal death rates going up."
In the US, maternal deaths have risen two years in a row, and in Britain the death rate is running at 14 per 100,000, the highest it has been for decades, Ms Dahlen says.

[Fuchsia!]

very interesting, I think they need to educate women more, on every aspect of a vaginal birth and a c/s. My friend wanted to book into a ante natal class and the whole thing was just on VB, and hardly any on CS. I think women need to be aware of the risks for CS.

Its so scary cause i know if i want any future children (which i do) i have to have a CS and its scary to think that i could haemorage, end up having a hysterectomy and all the other complications that are associated with it. Its very frightning and actually turns me off having more kids.

[stellarella]

But Sara although it is scary it is not as big of a risk as another VB for you so in that sense you know you are making the right decision. A c/sec is only more dangerous when the VB would be safer which is the vast majority of cases.

I know it's scary for you to see stats on c/sec but I know your story and I reckon you would be making the best decision to have another c/sec. I would even take that risk.

[forbetoel]

I agree with ella's advice for you jaxcoop. I have had 4 c/s, and it would be a 1000 more times dangerous for me to have VB. It may not be the ideal way to give birth, but for some people, including yourself and I, it is the safest option.

I think the article really is for the benifit of those contemplating a c/s delivery with no good medical reason.

[Fuchsia!]

yeah i hope some people DO read it, and realise that its not the easy way out and it is a lot more riskier.

Sheesh i have changed my views a lot now. The more i read the more im disliking c/s's.

Sometimes i think people think this is all BS and people are just making it up

[tobmac]

it makes you wonder with every new study they bring out about the safety of c/sections which one is right i have heard OB's say yes and no i think it depends on the OB who is actually invoved. I do beleive that some of the c./sections that are given are just the easy way out for some people, i have 3 friends and a cousin who have all had c/sections for elective reasons on they want to book in to have there babies and they dont want to go through labour and they have ALL gone private and were allowed to do so by their OB. The other 2 friends and myself that have had c/sections public have all had them for medical reasons, i dontknow of any public OB that does c/sections as an elective where the excuse is i dont want to go into labour. I think it is these private OB's who need to be spoken to as just because their patients pay doesnt mean that they know best when it comes to giving birth.

But hey thats just what i think anyway........

[GeorgiaAnne]

Yeah, I found that article pretty freaky too as someone who is planning a vbac.
Tobmac - I agree with you about the private obs needing to educate women further about the risks etc but I do think public obs need to be taught a bit more about "Failure to wait" c/s and allowing esp. first time mums a bit more time to get things happening. I had an ap haemorrage so wasn't afforded the luxury of time.

[mumofKieran]

Thanks for posting that Ella.

I found it quite disturbing also as someone who will be a VBAC at my next labour.

[reAllytee]

The more i read the more i am amazed.

I at least liked the fact that the one doctor was honest about how he felt in regards to a traumatic VB & that how it scars their souls. I can only imagine how they feel when things go wrong.

But in saying that it shouldnt be the reason we allow so many to have elective c/s.