C-section vs. letting Mom go naturally - page 3

by JRP1120, RN 7,770 Views | 56 Comments

Why am I hearing more and more of Dr.'s that ASK their patient's if they want to have a c-section instead of waiting and letting nature take it's course and baby comes naturally? I just don't get it! I have a friend that is... Read More


  1. 2
    Quote from klone
    I completely agree. I don't believe that it's out of greed at being able to bill more for a C/S. I believe it's out of fear of litigation.
    Fear of litigation over what? A healthy mom more than likely vaginally delivering a normal, healthy baby? We've been doing it for centuries and it's more safe now than ever before. I still agree that c-sections pose more risks, elective or not and should be a last resort based on any adverse health risks to mom and/or baby, not done for convenience of the Dr and/or the mom.

    My friend I speak of is very young, it's her first baby, and she never attended any child birthing classes, even though they've been offered and encouraged. Her young age and being scared of giving birth naturally probably helped the easy-going Dr offer her the option of just coming in and taking the baby out. As I said before, I'm old-school...I'm an advocate of letting that baby simmer until done, and barring no health issues of either mom or baby, waiting for mom's body to give birth as it was made to do.
    GooeyRN and caregiver1977 like this.
  2. 1
    Quote from patient1977
    I couldn't agree with the OP more if our brains were somehow wired together.

    But as a patient, I can tell you that if the patient doesn't educate themselves and advocate for what they want then doctors and nurses will often push many things off on the patient that are not necessary (not saying any of you do that . I actually got told off several times by a nurse during the labor of my first child (induced) because I didn't want an epidural.

    And I don't think the lawsuit excuse applies when a pregnant woman's due date is several weeks away and the only reason for doing a c/s is a 9 lbs. baby and the cervix is still closed and thick. Many times when the baby is actually born he/she doesn't weigh as much as what was GUESSED while the baby was in the womb.
    My thoughts exactly!! Our brains are wired!

    My friend is very young and didn't even attend any kind of child birthing class to even know her options. She's simply tired of being pregnant and afraid of having a big baby, that's it. IMO, shame on her Dr for taking advantage of that and offering to just cut her open for convenience sake! Arrrrgh, makes me mad! Lol. I bet dollars to doughnuts her baby won't be 9 lbs or more once it's born!
    caregiver1977 likes this.
  3. 3
    Quote from JRP1120, RN
    Fear of litigation over what? A healthy mom more than likely vaginally delivering a normal, healthy baby? We've been doing it for centuries and it's more safe now than ever before. I still agree that c-sections pose more risks, elective or not and should be a last resort based on any adverse health risks to mom and/or baby, not done for convenience of the Dr and/or the mom.
    Exactly, it's as normal as sneezing... we've been doing that since the beginning of time too and very rarely have trouble doing so. So why are 1/3 of babies born surgically?

    Unfortunately, in today's society care providers are sued far too often for not doing a cesarean when something isn't perfect .... the caveat is that we create the not-so-perfect scenarios by: not being healthy before pregnancy, not getting optimal prenatal care, utilizing surgeons for primary care for low-risk pregnancies when midwifery care is proven safe, relying (in my opinion) too heavily on technology to guide us, intervening when unnecessary.... the list goes on and on. The US doesn't support our pregnant women or postpartum families the way other countries do. In '06 our country was reported to have the 2nd worst newborn mortality rate in the world, Latvia was the only country that had more deaths. So, we are definitely not saving more babies by doing cesarean sections. Around that same time the maternal mortality rate, specifically for cesarean sections, was 4x higher than in vaginal birth. We desperately need a change.
  4. 0
    To the OP:

    Do you think you could talk to your friend and try to educate her? Would that be out of order? Is it too late to do so? A c/s is going to be rough unless she has a person or person(s) to do a lot of helping while she is recovering. Everyone (including myself) doesn't have a whole host of family and friends to take care of everything while new mom rests.
  5. 0
    Quote from klone
    Generally the dressing is removed after about 24 hours. There is typically no dressing change unless there is a complication like a dehiscence.
    Oops! Sorry, my message wasn't very clear! I meant dressing changes after a post-op wound infection. Our docs are re-opening more and more! Those are the dressing changes I am referring to!
  6. 0
    Quote from patient1977
    To the OP:

    Do you think you could talk to your friend and try to educate her? Would that be out of order? Is it too late to do so? A c/s is going to be rough unless she has a person or person(s) to do a lot of helping while she is recovering. Everyone (including myself) doesn't have a whole host of family and friends to take care of everything while new mom rests.
    I have already tried with no luck. She's made up her mind she has family ready and willing to help out, which will be good for her and a young husband that works a lot. I'm praying all goes well for her; I'm sure it will...I just wonder if by the time she's older and more mature and pregnant again, she'll wish she hadn't done this the first time around because now she's pretty much stuck with having c-sections. I think someday she will regret not educating herself or listening to her family and friends and letting her body do what it was made to do. It saddens me for her but I love her anyway! :heartbeat
  7. 4
    Ugh...and those are the kids we get in our NICU....the ones that the docs do the c/s on weeks before the due date without good cause! Luckily, the vast majority of our OB's don't do this and they are slowly weeding out the ones that do.

    People like it because they get to pick their due date, etc. Just had one from another hospital that was like your friend, except the kid turned out to be under 7 pounds, 36 weeks and had severe RDS, ended up on the vent, nitric, pressors, etc. The mom was like, well they never told me this could happen...no darling, they never do.

    I believe if they are going to do c/s earlier than the due date, they better be checking lung maturity....several of our docs do and that at least gives us a heads up!
    kacefaceRN, GooeyRN, JRP1120, RN, and 1 other like this.
  8. 1
    I totally agree with the person that recommended "The Business of Being Born". I watched it on Netflix also. It was very interesting.
    JRP1120, RN likes this.
  9. 1
    Quote from JRP1120, RN
    Fear of litigation over what? A healthy mom more than likely vaginally delivering a normal, healthy baby?
    Unfortunately, it's the "less than likely" complications that make the docs paranoid. You can never 100% guarantee a risk-free delivery. It's all the commercials out there that are "Did your OB doc do XYZ while you were pregnant/was your baby born with XYZ? You may have a case to sue! Please call, blahblah". It's hard for them to assume when that one assumption could accidentally land them in court...being sued.
    Not_A_Hat_Person likes this.
  10. 3
    When my cousin was pregnant with her 2nd, she called me very upset. Her doctor had done an ultrasound and recommended a c/section for her because they suspected macrosomia. This makes me really mad when docs do this. She was not gestational diabetic, her pressures were fine. There was nothing else wrong with her pregnancy other than they 'suspected' a large baby. I told her that I couldn't make the decision for her, but to remember 1) that women's bodies do know how to birth babies, and 2) 3rd trimester ultrasounds are notorious for being inaccurate. Her first had been over 8lbs and she had no trouble birthing him at all, and I asked her to remember that too. (Women in our family tend to grow them big - if it weighs anything under 9lbs, they ask you if that's the best you could do. My uncle was almost 12lb, NSVD, minor perineal tearing.)

    Well, the ultrasound was right - he was a large baby. 9lb 15oz, to be exact. Birthed vaginally. The same doctor who suggested the section also caught this baby, which I think served her right.

    IMO, it is a mix of things: control issue, fear of litigation, fear of losing revenue if you don't give the patient what she wants, being sick of a particular patient calling the office, and sometimes it is honest-to-goodness (if misplaced) a feeling of having the patient's best interest at heart. I think all those things come together to increase the elective c/s rate. It's probably not every one of these things for every doctor, but I think this covers most of the bases for most doctors. Most OBs I know are decent people and aren't out to intentionally harm anyone, but they only know what they've seen. It's amazing to think that there are doctors out there who've never been party to a low- or no-intervention birth.

    After recovering people from both NSVDs and from sections, give me ten NSVDs any day of the week before slicing my belly open once.


Top