If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#191
|
|||
|
|||
Tough decision - Elective C or not ?
Hillary Israeli writes:
: In , : Ericka Kammerer wrote: : *positions to facilitate an easier delivery. For instance, : *while you were pushing, were you always on your back or : *semi-sitting? Were you able to try side-lying or hands : *and knees or squatting? Those positions increase the : *amount of space available for your baby by *30 percent*! : Whoah. Ericka is channeling Todd. : Hillary! If you would have noticed, I think you would realize that there are a LOT of us around here who are channeling Todd. Or, as I am more inclined to believe Todd is channeling the collected wisdom of the newsgroup. ;-) Larry |
#192
|
|||
|
|||
Tough decision - Elective C or not ?
Liz writes:
: Larry - you there? Yes, right here. (waving) : Larry - you there? To say sections are in theory more risky is to say : that yes there is a risk of complication, though in actuality these : risks are minimal (1 in 100000 births was it? The theoretical risk : exists also in vaginal delivery i.e can, but doesn't always happen. I : think I can say theoretical risk without negating risk completely. No, not the way the word "theory" is used (on either side of the pond). Theory means what you thing the results should be, as opposed to practice, which means what the results are actually shown to be. If results a shown to be a certain way, if only for a small number of cases, it is still practice. In your paragraph above, I would have no argument if you substituted the word "statistical" for theoretical. While you may think it is a small distinction, those who are interested in scientific accuracy will think it is an important distinction. : It is not fair however to condemn me for publicising the potential : trauma of vaginal delivery, when so many here are free to tell section : horror stories with impunity. If I had criticised sections, then no : doubt I would have had women saying how wrong I was when section was : their only option, it went well, and potentially saved their life (in : case of emergeny section) I really can't win. Clearly both can go : wrong, BUT when section goes smoothly it is a better option for : someone like me. Let me address this paragraph to try and help you understand why some people object to your previous posts. You are correct that many have posted anecdotal stories of c-sections which did not go well, and in effect you have the right to post a story of a c-section which went well for you. If you had stopped there the storm of protests would not have erupted. However, you drew conclusions from your experience which is directly contradicted by a body of published medical research. The objection was to your claims that your preferences were safer (and when you make a statement like this, without the qualification that it applies only to you, most people take you to mean that you mean safer for birthing women as a whole). That is what you are receiving objections to. They hear you say that they would also be safer off getting c-sections. That is the way it reads. Finally, slightly off the topic, a poster whose name I believe is Johnathan Laramour (sp?) posted some questions regarding the procedures used during your birth experience. If you happen to answer the questions, I would be interested in the answers. Sincerly, (Monika said no more making out in public :-) Larry |
#193
|
|||
|
|||
Tough decision - Elective C or not ?
Hey Ericka,
She was doing this off the top of her head. She just added a superfluous zero. That would match the maternal c-section rate of 1/10,000 which I quoted and which is within 3% of what you quote. :-) ;-) Larry To Liz: See, I told you some people take the scientific accuracy thing seriously. Especially if you plan to reach conclusion with the information! :-) Ericka Kammerer writes: : Liz wrote: : To say sections are in theory more risky is to say : that yes there is a risk of complication, though in actuality these : risks are minimal (1 in 100000 births was it? : Whoa, that's *way* off, by orders of magnitude. In : one very large study comparing vaginal birth to c-sections, : the rate of complications for vaginal births was 4 percent : while the rate of complications for cesarean birth was : a whopping *16 percent*. The rate of uterine infection : for c-sections was 1.8 percent and the rate of hemorrhage : requiring transfusion was 1.9 percent. The rate of : complications for c-section is *four times* the rate : of complications for vaginal birth! : If you're talking just about maternal mortality : rates, you're still off by an order of magnitude, with : a large study in Washington State showing a maternal : mortality rate after c-section of 10.3/100,000, as : compared to a rate of 2.4/100,000 after vaginal birth. : Still, while maternal mortality is a very important : issue to look at, quality of life gets affected *long* : before mom actually dies. The rates of complications : that are serious and life-affecting are far higher : than 10.3/100,000. : Again, there are reasons to have c-sections, : obviously. But avoiding complications is not one of : them. It's the increased risk of complications with : c-section that one must weigh against any presumed : benefit of c-section! |
#194
|
|||
|
|||
Tough decision - Elective C or not ?
Michelle J. Haines wrote in message .. .
In article , says... Being honest as you ask me to be, I was not in the least bit afraid, at the time I was excited about meeting my baby. You weren't then, probably. You obviously are NOW. No shame in that. I'm terrified of another c-section, so I went way out of my way to avoid it for a third time. But when the baby was lying transverse breech and I was looking at it from that perspective, I would have just had to suck it up and deal with it. Luckily, she turned in the last week. The reason for me avoiding vaginal delivery again is due to the illness I suffered post childbirth - I was so ill it spoilt the whole experience for me and made the first months extremely distressing. This I want to avoid. Yes, you're afraid, regardless of the statistics, of what may happen. Michelle Flutist ************************************************** ****************************** Michelle, I had made the decision not write or even visit this group anymore. However, since you insist on telling me how I feel about any future births I may or may not have, I am compelled to set you straight on a few issues. Firstly, I think you'll agree you know absolutely nothing about me or how I am in the face of trauma and discomfort. I see categorically NO SHAME in admitting fear of labour or it's associated "evils" if indeed they happen. If this is how I felt I would say - whilst dealing with the agony of a 3 day labour, I can safely assert that I felt zero fear. This does not make me a hero, it means simply that I didn;t see my condition as an illness, rather the pain was what I would describe as a "clean" pain. I knew it was for the sole purpose of pushing out my baby, in this sense it seemed very much less "scary" than the pain I suffered a few years ago with a bad back. Labour pain was a million times more painful, though wasn't frightening compared to that associated with illness. I don't know if any other labouring women have found this too. In actual fact I can confess that I would feel more nervous and apprehensive about ceasarean purely because I'd be going "under the surgeons knife", a concept which is scary to anyone undergoing surgery. I can honestly say I have given this much thought. My exhaustion and strain was evident throughout the labout, though distress emerged after the fact. When it was over, I was instantly drained, I bled heavily, was in pain and I was ill. I didn't feel fearful however, this is an emotion I am sorry to say never emerged. Regret, sadness, distress for my baby's trauma ( he had been in distress for hours) and exhaustion were my feelings, though not fear. I do not "fear" this happening again, I just know I must do what I feel is right for me and any future babies. Even if I suffer in a similar way with a section, I at least know that my baby will not be in distress from being wedged in my pelvis for hours, and I will not be labouring (pointlessly) for a few days being ineffective in delivering my child. Secondly, in the same way that you wouldn't like me to start speculating on your feelings about vaginal birth, or indeed why you are now avoiding ceasareans - please refrain from insisting on me being fearful when you have no way of knowing this, particularly since you've never even met me. WHy are you so desperate anyway to make me fearful of labour? Very puzzling, maybe we should analyse that! Best Wishes Liz |
#195
|
|||
|
|||
Tough decision - Elective C or not ?
|
#197
|
|||
|
|||
Tough decision - Elective C or not ?
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
(IL.) Classroom misbehavior faces tough consequences | [email protected] | General | 0 | August 28th 03 05:35 PM |