Tough decision - Elective C or not ?

"paul williams" wrote in message
om...
Consultant has given us the choice :-

1. Elective C-section at 39 weeks.
2. Induce at 40 weeks.

Option 1 seems OK but consultant highlighted the risks involved with
any C-section.

Option 2 seems better if natural birth is possible. However, theres a
higher risk of emergency C-section which is obviously worse.

As others have said, you left out option 3 (which really *ought* to be
option 1), which is to do nothing at all and let the baby come under its own
steam.

Before you make any decisions, I suggest you read this article on induction
of labor for suspected large babies by Henci Goer, an acknowledged expert in
childbirth and childbirth research:

http://www.parentsplace.com/expert/b...234322,00.html

Are there any stats on how many Elective C-sections have problems ?

What about stats on how many large babies get forced down the
emergency C anyway? What about the extra risks of an emergency C
compared to an elective?



Also, my wifes decided on an epidural anyway in the event of normal
birth. Does'nt this provide problems with larger babies anyway?

It might, but you can't even be sure you've *got* a larger baby. Really.

The "issue" with larger babies and epidurals is that a large baby might get
hung up on the pelvis during descent (called "shoulder dystocia"). The most
effective solution to this problem is to get the mother to flip over into an
all-fours position. This move usually frees the baby's shoulder from the
pelvis and allows a normal descent. The problem is that if the mother has
had an epidural, she's probably not going to have enough sensation in her
legs to support herself on all fours. So the practitioner has to resort to
other methods for freeing the baby, some of which can result in birth
injuries.

But honestly, *most* vaginally birthed large babies don't encounter shoulder
dystocia at all and a fair number of babies who *do* experience it are not
large.

I'e'
forceps or ventouse delivery? Not what we want either....

Assisted delivery (whether by ventouse or forceps) goes way up with
epidurals *regardless* of baby's size. I had one birth with an epidural and
ventouse assistance was needed at the end of the pushing phase because I
could not feel well enough to push properly. Baby was an even 8 lbs., though
he did have a rather large head (15").

So if you don't want a forceps or ventouse delivery, you'd have the best
chance of doing so by avoiding the epidural regardless of the baby's size.
Obviously, epidurals have their place in childbirth and your wife should
have one in labor if she feels the benefits (pain relief) outweigh the risks
(potential assisted delivery, limited options for treating dystocia, etc.),
but maybe she shouldn't make that decision until she's actually *in* labor
and knows how well or poorly she's coping. Because, honestly, I've had two
unmedicated births since that first one with an epidural and I was never
remotely tempted to have another.
--
Be well, Barbara
(Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [18mo] mom)

This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop:
"She rose her eyebrows at Toby" -- from "O' Artful Death", by Sarah Stewart
Taylor

Daddy: You're up with the chickens this morning.
Aurora: No, I'm up with my dolls!

All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful.
Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its
other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a
fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman