I'm a first-year nursing student, and I just read an article in the Nov. issue of Vogue on a small but increasing number of women choosing to have elective c-sections for various reasons, including avoiding labor, and decreasing the likelihood of shoulder dystocia for the baby and eventual lady partsl prolapse for the mom.
Vogue doesn't publish their non-beauty/fashion articles online, so I can't provide a link for the whole text of the article. It does point out that, no matter which "ideology" you buy into, "there's only one standard that truly matters: a successful birth is a birth in which mother and child emerge alive and healthy."
I personally was floored that anyone would choose major abdominal surgery when it wasn't absolutely necessary.
Specializes in Case Mgmt; Mat/Child, Critical Care.
Originally posted by alphafe
Moondancer wrote:... are SUPPOSED to be delivered lady partslly, they have many more problems post c/s d/t missing out on the "big squeeze"...
Can you elaborate on what the big squeeze does for baby? What are the implications of baby missing this? Thanks.
Exactly what Carla wrote... when babies are born lady partslly, they are forced, if you will, through the birth canal and in so doing the majority of fluids are "squeezed" out of the baby, nature's own little suction device! LOL When babies are born via c/s they are simply removed from the uterus manually by the MD, so they miss out on that great benefit. A lot of c/s babies are pretty "wet" and require more vigorous suctioning as Carla stated.
Just my two cents on the issue..Haven't women been having babies for centuries and do you really remember the birth pain years later?
I've done both. #1 was c-section at 35 weeks for toxemia and #2 VBAC after 3 days labor (epidural all the way!!). Both were truely great experiences. I did like the c section...less pain and PP bleeding and not bad breast feeding. Maybe I don't remember the surgical pain so much because of meds and near death experience I went thru. With the second went VBAC was very tired (3 days labor) and sore with and episotimy. The point I'm getting at is this...If pain and the "ickiness" is whats making some women choose Csection, I think thats silly. How many women sit around years later grapping their abdomen and think "OMG the pain I had.."
I think alot of OBs are just being consumer friendly when agreeing with planned sections. I'm preggo with #3 and all three of my docs asked "Are YOU planning a VBAC or section?"
like it was my choice?? WOW! Just for the record...VBAC
While my hospital doesn't do c-sections for non medical reasons, many patients request them. Probably a higher number than who want to even think about labor.
Why?
Reputation. Two of the OB docs, my wife and another lady, do a marvelous job in surgery. Pts feel wonderful comming out, have almost no complications, and 3rd day discharge... they go home and come back for their pp visit talking about doing major house work while STILL caring for their baby. You rarely see ANYTHING written for pain upon discharge (always offered, never accepted). These moms just end up with an occasional Tylenol.
Any clue how hard it is to convince someone to labor when their sister/friend/niece/aunt just had a c-section and is doing EVERYTHING now?
Dave
Just out of curiosity, does your OB wife give Toradol to the c/s patients? That can make all the difference post-op.
Funny! I couldn't imagine choosing a CS over a lady partsl birth. I had my first two deliveries lady partsl. Then my third CS. Good grief! I would never volunteer to have a CS!!!!!!
With my first delivery, I wasn't even allowed an dang tylenol (started having complications.... it it was a military hospital). Second delivery, I joked with my doc about putting on my chart "Patient needs epidural put in place at 36 weeks!" We would joke about how I refuse to go through all that labor pain again.
Then, my third delivery was a scheduled CS. Sure, it's easy to lay there, Oh and Ah as they take the baby out, but good lord..... when that duramorph stopped work about 10 hours later, I thought I would die!
We had mishap after mishap. They couldn't get ahold of the doc, couldn't find my med chart from days (my nurse was a PRN nurse), morphine pump broke.... but they didn't realize this until two more hours had passed.
Good grief! I'd much rather pop out a lady partsl birth than ever risk another CS!!!!
I don't know anyone who wants to go through Labor, b ut Hey, too bad. If people want a C section, let them pay out of pocket. My health care costs are high enough. C sections cost many times of what a normal child birth costs. Just like a face lift, pay out of pocket!!!!!!!!!!
I had the opposite situation once with a patient. She was an 18yr old who had been laboring for several hours. The baby was showing a lot of signs of fetal distress, so we explained to her that we wanted to get the baby out now via c/s. She didn't want to have the tummy scar- was worried it would show when she wore her bikini. Took some talking, and wasted precious minutes before we got her to consent! All turned out fine, but
I am with you on that Barb!!! When we are constantly short of beds and staff, it is unconscionable to waste resources on a surgical procedure that isn't necessary for medical reasons.
kcrnsue, that just proves that a lot of teenagers are not mature enough to become parents!
One of my good RN friends just had her baby last Thurs. with an emergency c-section 30 min. after she got to the hospital because of major fetal heart rate deceleration. She went under anesthesia not knowing whether she would have a baby or not when she woke up. It was really scary and the baby was fine but besides all the trauma of that now she is dealing with post-op pain and a long stay in the hospital plus an infection. Plus, she didn't get to hold or breastfeed her baby until he was 2.5 hours old and "everyone and their brother" had held him. So any who would opp before-hand to have a c-section really need to consider their options carefully and the pros and cons of it, IMO.
One of my good RN friends just had her baby last Thurs. with an emergency c-section 30 min. after she got to the hospital because of major fetal heart rate deceleration. She went under anesthesia not knowing whether she would have a baby or not when she woke up. It was really scary and the baby was fine but besides all the trauma of that now she is dealing with post-op pain and a long stay in the hospital plus an infection. Plus, she didn't get to hold or breastfeed her baby until he was 2.5 hours old and "everyone and their brother" had held him. So any who would opp before-hand to have a c-section really need to consider their options carefully and the pros and cons of it, IMO.
Wow, that hit home, sounded like my Mom talking about my birth.
It was unheard of in 1952 to have tubal Ligation, but I was one of the "new" positive babies in a neg mother, pre Rogam, how ever it is spelled. If there was something wrong with the baby , they would not do the tubal.
She woke up and told her she did not have the tubal, period. I keep telling people I am going back to my original weight 5 lbs, zero ounces.
You can elect to have anything that you want to have; however, if you expect insurance to pay for anything, there had better be a solidly documented medical indication for a c-section. Patients don't get to pick if they have a c-section unless they are footing the bill AND the OB agrees to do it.
gypsyatheart
705 Posts
Exactly what Carla wrote... when babies are born lady partslly, they are forced, if you will, through the birth canal and in so doing the majority of fluids are "squeezed" out of the baby, nature's own little suction device! LOL When babies are born via c/s they are simply removed from the uterus manually by the MD, so they miss out on that great benefit. A lot of c/s babies are pretty "wet" and require more vigorous suctioning as Carla stated.