Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Older mums NOT the reason for increased c/sec rate

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Older mums NOT the reason for increased c/sec rate

    from: http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/young-mothers-in-caesarean-debate/2007/07/13/1183833774744.html

    Young mothers in caesarean debate
    Carol Nader
    July 14, 2007


    FIRST-TIME mothers and women who are induced or have previously had a caesarean are the biggest contributors to caesarean rates at the Royal Women's Hospital.
    That information comes from a study that challenges the belief that older women with complicated pregnancies are the reason for the rise in caesarean rates.
    An analysis of more than 5800 women who gave birth to more than 6000 babies at the hospital in 2005 shows that 1651, or 28.3 per cent, had a caesarean. This included 592 elective and 1059 emergency caesareans.
    Published in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, the findings will add to the debate that at least a proportion of caesareans are unnecessary.
    Doctors have said the rate is too high. There is growing concern that otherwise healthy young women have their first baby by caesarean when it is not medically necessary.

  • #2
    On one hand I'm so over this debate because there are so many women who have had cesarians feel guilty for it and feel they have to justify their choices or explain why they had to have one etc. On the other hand it is concerning that so many women are having cesarians out of fear (i'm making an assumption here). I would like to read a study on why there are so many cesarians.

    Its the reasons for electing that I'm interested in, not on who is having cesarians. if any of that makes sense .

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Owen&Noah's_mum View Post
      On one hand I'm so over this debate because there are so many women who have had cesarians feel guilty for it and feel they have to justify their choices or explain why they had to have one etc. On the other hand it is concerning that so many women are having cesarians out of fear (i'm making an assumption here). I would like to read a study on why there are so many cesarians.

      Its the reasons for electing that I'm interested in, not on who is having cesarians. if any of that makes sense .
      I dunno, but maybe finding out WHO has the highest rates of caesareans might help try to uncover the WHY.

      Like, now that it's discovered (albeit only at the Royal Womens...) that YOUNGER women are having them, it might be easier to discover why... like maybe talknig to younger women...

      I imagine a lot of younger mothers feel a little pressured, especially by the fact that a lot of us are more used to a "child" role, being told what to do and whatnot.

      I know part of hte reason for my caesarean was my own lack of knowledge and confidence to defend myself or object to thing... and I imagine I'm not alone on that one...

      Comment


      • #4
        What I found interesting was the First time mothers (easily lead IMO) and women who had previously had a c/s, which would be the first time mothers. So really I think they need to establish why first time mothers are having c/s.

        Comment


        • #5
          Hmmm the way I read this article, it doesn't necessarily say that all these c-sections were by the choice of the mother - after all it says there were almost twice as many 'emergency' c-sections as elective - just that there is a concern they weren't all 'medically necessary'.

          Not criticising those who elect to have caesars at all, I believe everyone has a right to choose:

          BUT I am glad that they are paying some attention to this, because I know there are a lot of women (including myself) who've had 'emergency' c-sections, and would argue that with different care they might indeed have had a 'normal' vaginal birth.

          Originally posted by becca74 View Post
          FIRST-TIME mothers and women who are induced
          I was a first time mother who was induced, and I absolutely believe that it was the induction and resulting interventions that resulted in my emerg c-section. And I'm not a 'younger' mother, although I did have a totally uncomplicated pregancy. The only thing 'wrong' with my pregnancy was that I hadn't gone into labour by the 42nd week so it was deemed 'necessary' to induce me.
          Last edited by ~Kimba~; 15-07-2007, 09:31.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kimbaleo View Post
            BUT I am glad that they are paying some attention to this, because I know there are a lot of women (including myself) who've had 'emergency' c-sections, and would argue that with different care they might indeed have had a 'normal' vaginal birth.
            I can definately understand that!

            It would be nice for them to go a step further and have "elective by choice," or "medically advised" type of electives though. I always feel so disheartened to know my "elective" caesarean has brought up the percentages, and that I'm lumped in the "elective" category. I don't believe I'm anything like women who TRULY elect their caesareans... not in regards to statistics anyway.

            By saying mine is "elective" kinda makes it sound like I was like, "Hey, I want a caesarean," and got one... but it SO wasn't like that for me (and many other women I imagine), so perhaps if they figured out who WANTED to have a caesarean, and those who were told they should have one. Would make studies seem a bit more accurate IMO.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SassyMummy View Post
              It would be nice for them to go a step further and have "elective by choice," or "medically advised" type of electives though. I always feel so disheartened to know my "elective" caesarean has brought up the percentages, and that I'm lumped in the "elective" category. I don't believe I'm anything like women who TRULY elect their caesareans... not in regards to statistics anyway.

              By saying mine is "elective" kinda makes it sound like I was like, "Hey, I want a caesarean," and got one... but it SO wasn't like that for me (and many other women I imagine), so perhaps if they figured out who WANTED to have a caesarean, and those who were told they should have one. Would make studies seem a bit more accurate IMO.
              Yep I'm hearing you , and I agree with you. The term 'elective' doesn't seem to differentiate between those mothers who genuinely wanted/ chose a c-section (which I'm not criticising, it's their choice), and those who may not have 'wanted' one per se, but were advised by caregivers that a c-section was 'necessary' before going into labour. That's why I'd call the latter a 'planned' c-section, rather than 'elective'.

              Perhaps for statistical purposes they should use the terms 'elective', 'planned' and 'unplanned/ emergency' and compare the stats between the 3, would be a bit more realistic I think, esp if they want to examine/ compare the reasons why a c-section eventuated.

              Comment


              • #8
                Stacey I totally agree with you.
                I think that in many cases women are given 'information' by theie care providers which can sway them into making choiced that they are not really happy to make, but are told that dire consequences may ccur if they do not make the choice. This, to me, is coersion. I myself was given some atrocious 'facts' from several obstetricians and thankfully the fats were so rediculous that I saw through it, and decided to get second opinions. Many women would have been terrified by this and would have allowed the Dr to do what he intended on doing.
                At the end of the day, women are not informed enough. They are not given the correct, up to date information, are not offered alternatives, are not told the risks, pros and cons. Women are not respected and given responsibility to make their own informed choices. Woman are not supported.
                I believe the caesarean rate is on the rise due to fear of litigation, fear among consumers and overuse of intervention. Give a man a hammer and everything becomes a nail.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ~Carlia~ View Post
                  I think that in many cases women are given 'information' by theie care providers which can sway them into making choiced that they are not really happy to make, but are told that dire consequences may ccur if they do not make the choice. This, to me, is coersion.

                  At the end of the day, women are not informed enough. They are not given the correct, up to date information, are not offered alternatives, are not told the risks, pros and cons. Women are not respected and given responsibility to make their own informed choices. Woman are not supported.
                  Absolutely

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by ~Carlia~ View Post
                    Stacey I totally agree with you.
                    I think that in many cases women are given 'information' by theie care providers which can sway them into making choiced that they are not really happy to make, but are told that dire consequences may ccur if they do not make the choice. This, to me, is coersion. I myself was given some atrocious 'facts' from several obstetricians and thankfully the fats were so rediculous that I saw through it, and decided to get second opinions. Many women would have been terrified by this and would have allowed the Dr to do what he intended on doing.
                    At the end of the day, women are not informed enough. They are not given the correct, up to date information, are not offered alternatives, are not told the risks, pros and cons. Women are not respected and given responsibility to make their own informed choices. Woman are not supported.
                    I believe the caesarean rate is on the rise due to fear of litigation, fear among consumers and overuse of intervention. Give a man a hammer and everything becomes a nail.
                    HEAR HEAR!

                    I also think it is depressing when you hear people say that they are 'over' this topic.


                    Women are being butchered physically, mentally and emotionally, and baby's denied their right to be born naturally, en masse, every day, and people are bored.....

                    There really is not much compassion left in this cold world, is there.....

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I was a young, first time mum, induced, ended with an emergency c-section statistic.

                      And I truely also believe, that my induction and constant monitoring which didn't allow me to get off my back, was one of the reasons why I had the c-section. I also believe that my induction wasn't needed (one week early due to high BP, not pre-eclampsia).

                      I am more well informed this time, and will be gunning for a VBAC, which I know is completely safe to do, however, doctors have been trying to coerce me into having an elective because it's "safer" blah blah blah...(i'm a public patient too, so it's not just private hospitals!)

                      So, I do think it has alot to do with the doctors too as to why the statistics are so high. They bombarded me with medical mumbo jumbo and tried to tell me it would be best to be induced (which I think resulted in my c-section) with DD and now i'm being bombarded with more medical mumbo jumbo as to why I should have an elective because it's apparently dangerous to have a VBAC!

                      So I think it has a lot to do with pushy scare-tactics doctors and scared, unable to defend themselves first time mums (regardless of age).

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I think that induction before you are due is definately most likely to end up in a c-section delivery, or forceps (ouch)! My cousins had 2 babies in her 40's, both long labours, but ultimately NVD's. I think there's way too much intervention these days when not needed. Babies come when they want to, not when we want them to.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I wonder if the stastistics of the research would change dramatically, if they were conducted at private hospitals... just a thought. I am the youngest of my friends and had both mine naturally. But friends of mine who chose, who are incidently older, to have c sections all had their own private drs and had their babies delivered in private hospitals. As far as I was aware, I thought it was mostly private that would consider giving a c section without a medical reason..

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X