Healthy women schedule C-sections to prevent vaginal stretching

SiennaGreen · Oct 15, 2007

OMG- spew tea through my nose funny! and true....

queenjean · Oct 16, 2007

My thoughts (for the whole two cents they are worth):

Elective c-section: I wholeheartedly support this, for whatever reason, even though I would never ever ever ever ever do it. I support it because I am on the other end of the spectrum--if godforbid my TL goes bad and I ever get pregnant, I will have a homebirth, probably in the water, and definitely with a lay midwife (yes, I work on an OB floor). I'd consider just doing it myself and my dh, but hubby isn't that kind of guy and couldn't handle it.

If I have looked at the risks and benefits of the various ways of birthing and chose a manner which meshes with my lifestyle, beliefs and philosophies, how can I say anything bad about a woman who has also looked at these things and come to a completely different conclusion? How can I support one end of the spectrum without supporting the other end? In supporting a woman's right to choose her birthing means, I feel I must support the right of those to choose elective c-sections for tight hoohaas, or scheduling, or whatever other reason they choose.

I personally find such reasons superficial and downright stupid--but I'm sure others might find my reasons for a homebirth the same. I expect to be able to birth how I am most comfortable and how I wish; I support a woman's right to do the same. She's the one who has to live with the consequences of her decision, whatever they may be.

Thoughts on lady partsl reconstruction:

WHERE are these lady parts beauty contests that apparently everyone is entering? I've seen hundres of lady partss, and I can't say I've ever had the thought "Hmmm, I wish my lady parts looked like that." Of course, I see them in childbirth, but still. If having the lady parts of a 20 year old is what you want, go for it.

Holy cow, though. What a freak show. Sweetheart, you can pluck it, surgically alter it, massage it, soak it in a nice hot clay bath, pierce it, tatto it, rub it down with hot oil, but in the end, it's still attached to you--however old and worn you are. What kind of 40 year old woman wants the lady parts of a 20 year old? Let me tell you, as I near forty, I realize that the 20s SUCKED almost as much as high school, the thirties ROCK, and I have even higher expectations of my forties. I am heavier, older, saggier--and have never been happier with my body or my sex life. Sex with my older, heavier, saggier husband is much better now than when we were teenagers (yes, we have been together that long). We laugh about it all the time.

I don't want that teenage or young adult life back, and I don't want that body back, either. Give me saggy boobs, stretch marks, and a flappy hoohaa anyday--they are simply proof of a life well lived.

SpiceChick01 · Oct 16, 2007

QueenJean, I am LMAO at flappy Hoohas! It's gotta go one day, ain't THAT the truth!!!!!!!

:lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

Jolie, BSN · Oct 16, 2007

There's surgery that you can have to tighten your lady parts. Apparently it's all the rage in Hollywood to have what I think they refer to as the "Jolie".

YIKES! If someone is going to name a "cosmetic" procedure after my screen name, shouldn't I get to choose what it is?

crissrn27, RN · Oct 16, 2007

I just gotta believe that the people doing this are either 1. Scared to death of what is supposed to be a natural event, but that we have medicalized so much that it is akin to brain surgery!

or

2. NOT told the risk appropriately

or

3. Really that vain, and self-centered, that they would put their child at increased risk of resp distress, TTN, etc (not to mention the risk for them)

If it only involved risk to mom, I would be willing to support it, but it doesn't. The baby is at an increased risk of TTN, other breathing problems, late preterm birth (and all those complications) if an amnio isn't done, and the anesthesia risk. Not to mention that c-section moms/babies are less likely to breastfeed, and future babies can have problems as well (previa, accreta)

Just not worth it, unless it is medically necessary.

magz53 · Oct 16, 2007

To get back to the original question of whether c-sections are done electively to preserve a lady parts.......I actually saw an OB write in the chart......"elective ceserean chosen to preserve the integrity of the lady parts as seen on the Today show" !!!!!!!!! Apparently there had been a discussion of such on a morning show. Mother's choice and all that aside, I cannot believe that insurance companies are paying the bigger bucks for a c-section as opposed to a lady partsl delivery. That puzzles me no end. I have also seen this same doc write in the chart summary the surgery as "repeat" c-section. Pretty hard to be a repeat when she was a primip. ( So tempted to turn him in for that one !! ) For the record, I had 5 kids ( won't bore anyone with the details ) and I have always had a nice sex life and am NOT incontinent.

dcampbell · Oct 16, 2007

I have had TWO fourth degree lacerations. My first birth ended with a terrible tear toward the rectum. A previous poster mentioned "a few days of discomfort". I should have been so lucky. For five solid weeks I could hardly sit down, the pain was unbearable. My second delivery ended with a fourth degree laceration in the other direction to the privy parts. Thank goodness I had an epidural in at the time. The doc had to sew the foley into me and the pain again was more than any woman should have to bear. Having taken care of patients that have had C/S's and traumatic deliveries it is hard to tell which is worst. But looking back I wish I had had C/S's instead due to the long term lingering problems I have had ever since the lady partsl births. Just my two cents.

jnrsmommy · Oct 16, 2007

I whole-heartedly agree, with all of the other elective surgeries that are available now, why not have a c-section be elective. Granted, I do believe that for the reason to "tighten up the lady parts" is definitely vain, but then, so are the other elective cosmetic surgeries that are not medically necessary. I think that the mentality today is "Why be you when you can be better" (stole that from Robots, but it fits).

Personally, I'm terrified of lady partsl births. I had my kids prior to entering nursing school or becoming a nurse. Just the thought of that grossed and freaked me out like nothing else ever could. I had an emergency c-section w/ my first and 14 1/2 months later, had my 2nd section. With both of those, I had the foley and IV removed the first night, up walking around, never took pain meds, and w/ the first one, I was bowling a week later (I know better now than to be doing that, but I felt great).

Honestly, the idea of a lady partsl birth still disturbs me. I have seen numerous different surgeries, helped secure someone's intestines that were coming out of an abdominal wound that dehisced, suctioned the nastiest sputum, cleaned up emesis, bm, you name it, I'm there, no problem. Show me a baby crowning, and I need a chair or wall STAT.

What gets me is the new moms who are just sooo beside themselves because they're delivery did not go as planned (usually, this is the ones that wanted a lady partsl birth but ended up w/ a section). Helllloooooo. Nothing is written in stone when it comes time to being in the hospital. You spent your time pregnant, you had the morning sickness, the weight gain, hot flashes, feet swelling, unbelievable mood swings, and you came into the hospital pregnant, and leaving w/ a baby. So it didn't come out the way that you wanted, look at the bigger picture, you're leaving w/ what you spent the better part of a year making.

Jolie, BSN · Oct 16, 2007

I whole-heartedly agree, with all of the other elective surgeries that are available now, why not have a c-section be elective. Granted, I do believe that for the reason to "tighten up the lady parts" is definitely vain, but then, so are the other elective cosmetic surgeries that are not medically necessary. I think that the mentality today is "Why be you when you can be better" (stole that from Robots, but it fits).
Personally, I'm terrified of lady partsl births. I had my kids prior to entering nursing school or becoming a nurse. Just the thought of that grossed and freaked me out like nothing else ever could. I had an emergency c-section w/ my first and 14 1/2 months later, had my 2nd section. With both of those, I had the foley and IV removed the first night, up walking around, never took pain meds, and w/ the first one, I was bowling a week later (I know better now than to be doing that, but I felt great).
Honestly, the idea of a lady partsl birth still disturbs me. I have seen numerous different surgeries, helped secure someone's intestines that were coming out of an abdominal wound that dehisced, suctioned the nastiest sputum, cleaned up emesis, bm, you name it, I'm there, no problem. Show me a baby crowning, and I need a chair or wall STAT.
What gets me is the new moms who are just sooo beside themselves because they're delivery did not go as planned (usually, this is the ones that wanted a lady partsl birth but ended up w/ a section). Helllloooooo. Nothing is written in stone when it comes time to being in the hospital. You spent your time pregnant, you had the morning sickness, the weight gain, hot flashes, feet swelling, unbelievable mood swings, and you came into the hospital pregnant, and leaving w/ a baby. So it didn't come out the way that you wanted, look at the bigger picture, you're leaving w/ what you spent the better part of a year making.

I find your last paragraph curious. You state that you would not choose a lady partsl delivery due to personal concerns, yet you seem judgemental of women who are equally disturbed by having a surgical birth. Why is it OK to desire a surgical birth, but not OK to be disappointed over the loss of a planned lady partsl delivery?

scattycarrot, BSN, RN · Oct 16, 2007

Interesting thread. I am 17 weeks pregnant and was told,in 2001, that I would have to deliver by c-section after a car accident fractured my pelvis and hip. I do not want a c-section for all the reasons tht have been discussed here and luckily, I have a very supportive obgyn who respects my wishes for a lady partsl delivery and we are going to work towards that goal with the help of PT(yipee!). I cannot fathom why some-one would want major surgery as opposed to a lady partsl delivery( and I am talking about women who have no medical need for a c-section). Now, I respect the womans choice to do what she wants with her body but I often think that to the average woman with no knowledge of healthcare, that c-sections do seem an easy option. Surgery has become so common that people forget that there are serious risk factors involved with any surgery and particualry, major abdominal surgery. For me, knowing what I know, I want to avoid surgery at all costs. I have seen to many patients with infected and dehissed wounds, adhesions, perforations, PE's, etc... for me to want surgery. Now, if I have to have one anyway, than so be it but if I had a choice, such as these ladies have who only want a c-section to maintain the integrity of their lady parts, than it would be a lady partsl delivery all the way.

RainDreamer, BSN, RN · Oct 16, 2007

That is a bit disturbing and to electively chose a c-section (for no medical reason other than you just rather have a c-section) is very selfish, IMO. The most disturbing thing is that these women are ok with compromising their baby's health.

ERGirl83 · Oct 16, 2007

Has anyone personally encountered this, or known a doctor who would do it?
Every woman I have ever known who has experienced both has said that a lady partsl birth is MUCH less painful, even a very traumatic delivery vs. a c-section with no labor at all.
Keep in mind that this is not a criticism of necessary c-sections.

I'm going to have to disagree with "every woman you have every known who has experienced both." My c-section and recovery, INCLUDING complications (staph infection and seroma) were a thousand times better than my labor and attempts at pushing. I would choose a repeat section any day, and in fact, I probably wouldn't even have any more kids if I couldn't have a section.

Personally, I believe that a woman has the right to make INFORMED choices about her body and her medical care, and that includes the right to request a c-section over a lady partsl delivery. I certainly don't think it's a great choice to have a c-section to avoid "lady partsl stretching," but I respect the fact that not every woman views a lady partsl delivery as some special rite of passage. I firmly believe that a woman and her doctor should sit down together, go over the pros and cons of each, and then make an informed decision. If only my doctors would have listened to me throughout my pregnancy when I told them I had a feeling I would need a c-section, and when I begged them to schedule one, perhaps we could have avoided 30 hours of labor, and the two of us almost dying.

I also don't see why we're so up in arms about having a c-section to avoid a seemingly cosmetic (or accessory) problem, but we don't have problems with 16 year olds getting breast augmentations and liposuction.