Tough decision - Elective C or not ?

"Denise" wrote in message ...
"Liz" wrote in message

Hi

I have read all previous messages regarding c-section versus vaginal
births, and I have to say that I would NEVER have a vaginal birth
again by choice. I am not saying that all vaginal births are
horrific, because thay arn't, but why put yourself through something
which is potentially damaging when you can now opt for a surgical
alternative?

You really sound naive. Women's bodies are created to nurture life through
pregnancy, birth and infantism. To say that you should just have a
C-section to not have to deal with childbirth is ridiculous, to say the
least. I'm 24. I've had 3 vaginal births in the last 5 years. I have no
scars other than my stretch marks. I've never had an episiotomy. I tore
and required stitches with the first, but not with the 2nd or 3rd. I've
never, ever had a problem with making it to the bathroom on time. I would
say a good 75% of my friends have children, and we're not sitting around on
the playground commisserating over "weaked pelvic floor muscles, piles, or
aches and pains."




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

You are lucky! I am not saying that women should exclude vaginal
births altogether, I certainly wouldn't. However, as much as you
quote your friends and their lack of long term effects, mine are
unfortunately very real. I had a large baby, and struggled to give
birth vaginally - this is a fact! My mother had 10Ib babies and had
exactly the same problems and had a uterine prolapse which needed
surgery 5 years post child birth. If you recall I did acknowledge
that trouble free vaginal births are probably best option, though
women in my position, certainly those I have come into contact with
were much happier with their stress free second c-section delivery.
You cannot really comment unless you have encountered my difficulties.
C-sections are theoretically more risky, as is any surgery - but when
a woman like myself goes on to have one which runs smoothly, then that
is the better option. Healing from a surgical scar would to me be "a
walk in the park" compared with blood transfusion, piles, incontinence
and vaginal stitches. Please remember though I stress that this is
the case so long as my c-section ran smoothly.

Cathy Weeks wrote:


The mistake you are making, is assuming that your next
birth will be
like your first. Andrea - who has had 11 babies, 10
vaginally, can
tell you how much more difficult it is to recover from a
c-section
than an easy vaginal birth.

Well I can tell you how difficult it was for 'me' to recover
from my c/section compared to 'my' vaginal births...about a
zillion times harder, but I concede that not everyone will
have such a hard time of it. I also had to recover from a
haemorrhage, a operative complication, a bad dose of the flu
(twice, a week a apart) and care for 10 other children after
my c/section, not everyone will have those variables ;-)


--
Andrea

If I can't be a good example, then I'll just have to be a
horrible warning.

Taniwha grrrl wrote:

might concievably do your pelvic floor
muscles some damage but giving birth vagainally

Argh wtf is wrong with my spell check, it never freaking
picks anything up.


--
Andrea

If I can't be a good example, then I'll just have to be a
horrible warning.

Liz wrote:

My mother had 10Ib babies and had
exactly the same problems and had a uterine prolapse which
needed
surgery 5 years post child birth.

It's more likely your weak pelvic floor muscles are a
genetic gift from your mother rather than a result of your
childbirth. Or considering you didn't have the best time
with your first baby perhaps the condition was made worse
because of your birth but odds are because you mother had a
prolapse you would of experienced these things with age in
time anyway...genetics.


--
Andrea

If I can't be a good example, then I'll just have to be a
horrible warning.

Larry McMahan wrote in message ...
Liz writes:

: I have read all previous messages regarding c-section versus vaginal
: births, and I have to say that I would NEVER have a vaginal birth
: again by choice. I am not saying that all vaginal births are
: horrific, because thay arn't, but why put yourself through something
: which is potentially damaging when you can now opt for a surgical
: alternative? Ok I hear you cry, what do I know?

Damaging??? Surgical alternative. Excuse me, but these are loaded
expressions. Almost all medical studies comparing the two show that
the "surgical alternative" is more damaging (and *risky*) than vaginal
birth. Do the research on the comparisons of the two!

: I had a 9Ib 8oz baby boy who was three days early. Because I wasn't
: really large enough to give birth to him without problems, I went thru
: a 36 hour labour, had ventouse, had an episiotomy, heamorrhaged
: severely and was left knackered, drained and traumatised. At the time
: I was so excited about meeting my baby I went with the flow, but my
: baby's heart rate was constantly dropping so blood tests were taken
: from his head "in utero" to check his oxygen levels, and I didn't push
: for an emergency c-section to reduce the resulting trauma. With my 3
: pint blood loss, the obstetrician remarked that in hindsight it would
: have been wiser to opt for one. It took me months to recover.

While this may have happened to you, it is totally out of the norm.
It makes me wonder if you were induced or augmented, what position
you were required to labor in, and if you had an epidural, all of
which increase your risk. It also makes me wonder, that if you had
all these problems during labor that your OB didn't decide to section
when the baby went into distress.

: I believe that if vaginal births run smoothly then brilliant, they are
: the best option, but at best most women are left with a weakened
: pelvic floor, piles, and aches and pains for the rest of their lives
: (especially with larger babies)

Again, medical studies do not bear these conclusion out. Only for
women required to birth flat on their backs or semi-sitting. Size
of the baby is generally NOT a factor.

: (especially with larger babies) I am only 30, but can never make it
: to the loo in time - yet my friend who had two elective c-sections
: feels no after effects what so ever. She had a mild infection in her
: scar after the second, but after seeing me trying to get over my
: episiotomy, says her troubles were like a walk in the park.

: I always feel irritated when people try to say c-sections are major
: surgery and far more risky. Perhaps in theory they are, but if
: they're so much the worse option, why do the rich and famous pay for
: them in their droves?

Well, in the first place they are riskier. The odds of maternal death
for a c-section are about 1/10,000, for a vaginal birth about 1/70,000.
Now both those numbers are small, but they are worse for c-sections.
Also, c-section babies have more problems than vaginally born babies.

As for the rich and famous, I suspect that they gravitate toward
expensive doctors who are prone to practice convention-based medecine,
rather than evidence-based medecine.

: ALso, you ask the majority of women who have
: had an experience like me and then go on to have a c-section with
: second pregnancies which they found easier. All the women I have
: asked this question of have said c-section any day of the week. I have
: asked many women this question, because I felt guilty for wanting that
: option for my next baby. At the very least you haven't been in hours
: of labour with c-sections, you can look after your little one having
: had a good nights sleep the night before birth. You can justifiably
: stay immobile for a few days bonding with the baby. I certainly
: staggered around with a drip unable to sit or walk properly - you
: might have pain from surgery, but believe me you get pain with an
: episiotomy and pushing small elephant through your pelvis.

I tell you what, let's wait until the women on this newsgroup who have
had both weigh in on this thread. I've seen it before. The vast majority
will tell you that their vaginal experience was better. Just wait.

: I don't want to scare anyone with my experiences, but I feel quite
: passionate about this trend in making women feel bad about c-sections.
: True, things can go wrong with them also, but if your baby is large,
: you have had previous difficulties then I believe it to be the best
: option. WHen I have my next child, I'll let you know which was the
: best type of birth.

I don't think you will scare anyone who has done the research. The
results are pretty clear cut and quite different from your conclusions.
You experiences, as difficult as they have been, are atypical, and may
have been caused by additional factors that you haven't taken into
account.

: Love Liz xx

XXOO,
Larry

************************************************** ******************************

Hi larry,

I really enjoyed reading your good humoured reply to all my points
regarding my views on child birth. I am amazed everyone here seems to
be determined to say c-sections are an ooption to be avoided. Looking
back at the posts before I shared my views however and the view seems
to be a little less one sided. I quote "my baby was breech too. i
opt for the Elective C. no problem. it is quick and easy. he was
out within a few minutes. no agony and pain..." ALso, the woman who
had an emergency c-section and is now opting for an elective, but
won't say why....could it be because the vaginal part of her first
delvery was so awful she would rather not be back there again?

I AM NOT SAYING that c-sections are less risky people - I am NOT
niave either (thanks!!) but the fact remains that pushing for hours in
agony, being cut in your nether regions, and ending up exhausted and
spent, whilst not everyones experience was in fact mine. Ceasarean in
this case, and for all those other women who feel damaged by the whole
procedure is a wiser option. Why the hell would it be offered on
emotional and medical grounds for women like me if it weren't? I have
been told categorically that it is better given my history of bleeding
and larger babies - and to save me the mental trauma of before. Why
do so many people recommend this after traumatic vaginal delivery if
c-section is gonna be even more traumatising?

I rest my case - an emotive issue clearly - we are all doing the best
we can really

Liz xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(for you Larry)

Liz, your operating assumption is that for a particular woman, every
birth experience is going to be a carbon copy of the previous one.

As I've mentioned before, I had a section with my first followed by 2
VBACs. Each birth was a totally different planet - so completely
different that its hard to believe.

First time out, my water broke, and I made the mistake of going to
hospital too soon. They wouldn't let me eat, I couldn't get any rest,
and labour fizzed and popped. They should have sent me home, but they
decided to up the ante, so they put me on pitocin. I got increasingly
exhausted, and strung out as the hours rolled by and more and more
tubes and machines got attached to me, and the interventions increased
to try and push my labour. In the end, after an epidural, my blood
pressure plummeted and I ended up in the OR. The whole experience was
a nightmare lasting from Tuesday night to Thursday morning.

Instead of assuming labour itself was the cause of the misery, I
really thought about what had happened and replayed alternatives in my
brain. What if...they'd just sent me home? What if we hadn't been so
scared and intimidated? What if I'd been better rested and able to
eat? What if we'd had better support (i.e. what happened at the
hospital was an endless parade of staff in and out as the shifts
changed, and everyone was a stranger and had a different opinion on
what I should or shouldn't do). What if I'd said no to pitocin (given
at the time, baby was fine so there was no pressing need to make
labour speed up). What if I hadn't had an epidural, what if?

So, with baby #2, I decided to try something different and see what
happened. I hired a midwife/GP combination. I laboured at home with
the midwife, hung out in my bed, the bathtub, ate what I felt like
eating. Labour moved along smartly, I arrived at hospital almost ready
to push, had a vaginal birth with no drugs or interventions, but did
have a tear due him coming arm first. Whole thing took about 6 hours
start to finish. Baby#2 was within 3 ounces of baby #1 as well - 9 lb
8 ounces vs. 9 lb 11.5 ounces, so size wasn't the issue from the first
fiasco.

Third baby, I ended up being induced at 42 weeks, but once they got
labour going, all the tubes and machines went away and my attendants
were midwives only. Entire labour took 1 1/2 hours start to end, no
pain drugs, no tears, baby was 10 lb 4 ounces.

You should think hard about your birth experience before you assume
there was anything wrong with you - think about how it was managed and
supported. Another vaginal birth would not necessarily be anything
similar at all to your first.

Mary G.

Liz wrote in message
compared with blood transfusion, piles, incontinence
and vaginal stitches. Please remember though I stress that this is
the case so long as my c-section ran smoothly.

All women should be doing kegel exercises to strengthen up the pelvic floor.
That will take care of the incontinence problem. For piles, keep up a high
fiber diet and drink plenty of water.

I can't believe you would even suggest not going through a vaginal birth to
other women. The lies you are spreading is just terrible, but I am sorry
that you had such a bad experience. Not all women have your problems because
they had a vaginal birth. Yours was an exception and not the rule. I had
three vaginal births in five years. No problems on my end. Do the exercises
and eat healthy foods and your problems will most likely go away.
--
Sue (mom to three girls)
I'm Just a Raggedy Ann in a Barbie Doll World...

Cathy Weeks wrote:


I guess I'd like to know - is there anyone who has had a difficult
vaginal birth - then went on to have easier vaginal births - what made
it easier? What did you do differently?

Cathy Weeks
Mommy to Kivi Alexis - 12/01

I've had all three.
C-section, difficult VBAC, easy VBAC's.

My C-section was very typical. It was performed after about 7 hours of induced labor due to fetal
distress.
My epidural worked fine, my baby was OK, I had a horrid case of the shakes and itched from the PCA
morphine but was
raring to go home three days after she was born. I was sore, it was miserable getting out of bed
(we had a very low bed) and anything
more than walking around the house exhausted me. It took me a good 4 weeks to feel anything close
to 'normal' but I wasn't absolutely MISERABLE, I had just had major abdominal surgery (I was also
21 years old, healthy and active, and a healthy weight).
Fast forward 16 months to my first VBAC. Another induction (very low fluid supposedly). Totally
unripe cervix (closed, hard, high) no ripening agent used. They just blasted me with pit. I was
strapped to the bed from the get-go, had a negative epidural experience and it took almost three
hours to push out a 7lb baby due to his poor position and I had a good sized episiotomy. He ended
up with polycythemia and RDS and I had a paralyzed bladder (cath'd for 10 days, took 4 weeks to
void without conscious thought and to this day 9 years later I have retention issues) Breastfeeding
was rough to start and he still has lower respiratory issues. Not exactly a dreamy vaginal birth. I
took more postpartum pain killers with that VBAC than with my C-section, cried more, felt miserable
for quite a while, that one took a while to process.
I've had 4 VBAC's since then and they've all been great, especially the last three who were all
assisted by midwives.

What made the last 4 (especially the last 3) so different than the first VBAC? Education. Informed
choices. Knowing my options, knowing the possible consequences of choices I made, being a partner
in my care, having a connection with my HCP, having midwives, having my husband understand the
choices I was making and support them, having confidence in myself and my body's ability to birth,
not having an epidural, and the fact that they were subsequnt births had something to do with it
too. Although they have not gotten consecutively easier. They have all been quite different. I'd
have to say my easiest birth was far and away #4, also my only spontaneous birth.

Let's take my last birth on Sept 15. It's now Oct 3 and I've been feeling perfectly NORMAL for
quite a while. My bum felt a bit bruised for about a week and that's it.

If I thought that all vaginal births would be like my first one, then maybe I would have scheduled
C-sections, but I knew they didn't HAVE to be that way and in my case I've been proved right. In a
different hospital, with different doc's (or midwives) I don't believe Jack's birth would have been
the way it was, it didn't need to be that bad for the two of us.

Karen

Paul W wrote:

3. What coping methods for labor have you researched and practiced using


in


the event that an epidural doesn't work, doesn't work completely, or


cannot


be administered for some reason? (They don't always work. I have even met
one woman whose cesarean was performed with an epidural that failed, and
this is not as rare as you may think.)



Was'nt aware that epidurals sometimes don't work?


Not necessarily directed at Paul, more at folks (medical and other) who
just assume epidurals are fine and dandy, but this one just gets me.
The CNP in my OB's office said that she has had 2 failed epidurals and
one birth that went too fast for an epidural to be administered. But
she still can't figure out why I'd rather make plans to not have an
epidural at all than to just plan on having one right from the get-go.

Valerie

Liz writes:

: Hi larry,

: I really enjoyed reading your good humoured reply to all my points
: regarding my views on child birth.

Good humored? Who, me? Liz, could your follow up to my responses on
ALL the threads in this newsgroup?

: Liz xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(for you Larry)

I'll take all I can get. :-)


XOXOXOXO,
Larry