Tough decision - Elective C or not ?

Paul W wrote:


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


About 20 percent of the time epidurals either
don't work at all or provide less than complete pain
relief. Providing less than complete pain relief
is far more common than not working at all.

Best wishes,
Ericka

"Chotii" wrote in message
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.)

Paul W wrote in message
Was'nt aware that epidurals sometimes don't work?

Oh now were getting to the nitty gritty. Is your wife aware that epidurals
don't always work?

Epidurals are notorius for not working completely. Sometimes it causes
headaches and sometimes they can work too good and mom doesn't know when to
push. When that happens, they have to turn the medication in the epidural
down or off all together. Then mom will then start to feel the contractions
again and be in pain. So your wife is going to need coping tecniques unless
she is going for the C-section right off the bat.

For anecdotal advice;

I received an epidural with my first child. She was posterior and I had
tremendous back labor. (I wished I had read up on back labor and had better
coping techniques for dealing with it). After 19 hours of no progress, I was
exhausted and agreed to an epidural. Since baby was posterior, the nurses
had me lay on my left side to get baby to move (should have been up and
walking or on all fours or whatever, but not in bed, lol). The medication
in the epidural couldn't get to my right side, so you know what? I was numb
on my left and felt the horrible pain in my right leg. I couldn't feel my
left leg, so hubby had to lift it up and hold it every time I pushed. Then I
couldn't feel the contractions to push, so they turned it off all together.
I then felt the contractions and finally was able to push her out. I really
think Paul that you and your wife need to do some more research. Just
because your wife is a nurse, it doesn't sound like OB/GYN is her
department. Nursing is very different in different departments in the
hospital. Just like doctors have specialties and are good in only one aspect
that they are trained in. Since she probably does understand researching,
she needs to read some more. )
--
Sue (mom to three girls)
I'm Just a Raggedy Ann in a Barbie Doll World...

Paul W wrote:

Only worry is that these things like epidural and C won't be available NOW
in the heat of the moment so to speak...

I have read several stories now over the internet, heard several in
person from mothers, nurses, midwives, about how 'emergency cesareans'
still took 30-45 minutes to prepare. If you're in the hospital, there
is a good chance you will get what you need when you need it.

I also know of someone who had planned an out of hospital birth and had
a cord prolapse. With an ambulance ride and excellent coordination with
the receiving hospital, the baby was born by true emergency cesarean
within 14 minutes of the call.

Kris

"hierophant" wrote in message
m...


Paul W wrote:

Only worry is that these things like epidural and C won't be available
NOW
in the heat of the moment so to speak...

I have read several stories now over the internet, heard several in
person from mothers, nurses, midwives, about how 'emergency cesareans'
still took 30-45 minutes to prepare. If you're in the hospital, there
is a good chance you will get what you need when you need it.

I also know of someone who had planned an out of hospital birth and had
a cord prolapse. With an ambulance ride and excellent coordination with
the receiving hospital, the baby was born by true emergency cesarean
within 14 minutes of the call.

Kris


Are you all in the UK or US?

In article ,
hierophant wrote:


Paul W wrote:

Only worry is that these things like epidural and C won't be available NOW
in the heat of the moment so to speak...

I have read several stories now over the internet, heard several in
person from mothers, nurses, midwives, about how 'emergency cesareans'
still took 30-45 minutes to prepare. If you're in the hospital, there
is a good chance you will get what you need when you need it.

I also know of someone who had planned an out of hospital birth and had
a cord prolapse. With an ambulance ride and excellent coordination with
the receiving hospital, the baby was born by true emergency cesarean
within 14 minutes of the call.

I had to wait quite some time after making the decision before my baby was
born, but really it wasn't an emergency. I was wrung out and exhausted, but
neither the baby nor I was in any danger. I'm sure if either of us had
been, it would have happened blindingly fast.

-Liz

"hierophant" wrote in message
m...


Paul W wrote:

Only worry is that these things like epidural and C won't be available
NOW
in the heat of the moment so to speak...

I have read several stories now over the internet, heard several in
person from mothers, nurses, midwives, about how 'emergency cesareans'
still took 30-45 minutes to prepare. If you're in the hospital, there
is a good chance you will get what you need when you need it.

I also know of someone who had planned an out of hospital birth and had
a cord prolapse. With an ambulance ride and excellent coordination with
the receiving hospital, the baby was born by true emergency cesarean
within 14 minutes of the call.

Kris


I had a friend who went from going to the bathroom going back to the monitor
to have the baby checked, there wasn't any heart beat and had an emergency
c-section all in about 7 minutes (this is what the mom said). So it all can
be done very quickly. this was in the US.
Kat
Mama to Maggie 11/03/01
#2 EDD 02/03/04

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


Spinals don't always either. I had one with my 3rd c-section - planned -
and it didn't take.
--
Sophie -
TTC #4

Paul=A0Williams wrote:
snip

However, an emergency C-section after 25
hours labour is the worst option by far. You're
operating on a mother whos already
exhausted, possbily having to rush the op,
cutting through contracting muscle etc...

Really.......I had a c section after 26 hours of induced labor. I can
contest to the fact that babies not in the optimal postion during birth
do not come out well at all. I was unaware of this however due to have
an uneventful pregnancy with only one ultrasound around the 20 week
mark. He was head down BUT face up.

Anyway I had no problems with a c section after being in labor for so
long. I actually healed up quickly plus was discharged from the hospital
after 2 nights and 2 and 1/2 days instead of the 4 days they usually
keep you. I was doing all baby care on my own and very restless. BUT I
still wouldn't take a c section over a typical vaginal delivery any day.
I hope for the next to go into labor on MY OWN and have a vaginal
delivery. If I don't, I would consider a repeat c section. Only thing I
will not tolerate is a doctor who stretches cervices (yes mine did that
to me the last time without consent). I won't have internals ever again
before I go into labor. That is when the ob did the cervix stretching.
I will let nature take it's course totally on it's own with NO PITOCIN.
If that doesn't work, then it will be c section if again my water breaks
with no labor after a certain time period.

Again I wouldn't trust ultrasounds in terms of predicting size
accurately and sure wouldn't have a c section for that reason. It is
possible to have a c section successfully after having been in labor. I
did it. No complications whatsoever.

And not to sound like a broken record, but a lot else can go on with
epidurals as in:

1. They won't give you one because you are not far enough advanced in
labour.
2. They won't give you one because you are too far advanced in labour
(this happens when women make faster progress than expected and either
the woman shows up at hospital almost ready to push, or else by the
time the anesthetist is available, its time to push.
3. No anesthetist available - happens if there are lots of women in
labour, major accidents come in, middle of the night in small
hospitals in many places etc.
4. You have an epidural and it doesn't work, or only works on one
side.
5. Baby is in funny position so they want you to be able to move
around so they either say no, or they let it wear off by time to push.
6. It wears off before the moment of truth and they won't top it up.
7. You have a history of back problems or surgery - they can refuse to
do one.

Paul, you and your wife would be very naive indeed to let "have an
epidural" be your only coping strategy for labour pain.

Having had an epidural, I found it profoundly unpleasant (couldn't
move, needed tubes and catheters, very miserable). It also adversely
affected my blood pressure and led to fetal distress and the OR for a
section. My subsequent two births, were VBACs with no pain drugs, and
my conclusion is that the pain was quite managable. Stress and
exhaustion were the real enemy, and that can frequently be countered
with the right labour support (midwife or doula along with hubbie).

Mary G.
Mom of three

"W Lee" wrote in message ...
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. i too had
epidural. i was really scared at the begining, but afterwards, i felt
better once my baby is out. it is very confusing when you are given all
those option. go with your patternal instinct. talk to your wife about it.
think what is best for you both and go with it. nature does it without
anything. sometimes the doctor tells you so much , it is scary to know. i
think they don't help to solve your problem but give you a whole lot more to
worry. don't think about it too much. go with your paternal instinct. to me
it usually works out well for us. good luck to you both.
"paul williams" wrote in message
om...
Wifes now 36 weeks but baby is measuring up to 40 weeks already so it
looks very large.

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.

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

Confused Father....


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? Ok I hear you cry, what do I know?
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. 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) 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? 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 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.

Love Liz xx