Quantcast
 
 
 
Top Story
The Politics of Gay Marriage in Campaign 2008
My Journey to the Top
 
 
Latest News
Alabama sheriffs feed inmates on $1.75 a day
 
 
expand
HEALTH

Birth, The American Way

One third of babies in this country are delivered by C-sections. A graphic new documentary asks why.

By Jennie Yabroff | NEWSWEEK
Jan 28, 2008 Issue | Updated: 2:36  p.m. ET Jan 19, 2008

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: electivecesarean.com @ 02/29/2008 12:01:01 PM

    Comment: Susan, the first thing I would like to say is that your persistent use of the adjective MAJOR in front of the word surgery is unnecessary. It goes without saying that cesarean delivery is not equivalent to a more minor surgery such as removing a skin lesion for example.

    Secondly, you say: You know for a fact, cesarean surgery has more risks to mom and baby than vaginal birth. I certainly do not know this for a fact, particularly when we are talking about a planned cesarean delivery at 39 weeks EGA for a healthy woman who is planning a small family. If, however, you are referring to all cesarean outcomes ??? including emergency surgery and surgery for medical reasons ??? and comparing them only with successful vaginal delivery outcomes, then that is different. Of course if that is the case, you are also not comparing apples with apples???

    You then ask: So why do you feel it is ok for an OB to advise a woman home birth is dangerous, but it is ok for an OB to tell a woman major surgery (c-section) is safe? I don???t believe that OBGYNs in America are advising women that surgery is categorically safe, and furthermore, I think that by accusing them of this, you are at best underestimating, and at worst insulting their professional integrity. It has been my experience that OBGYNs see it as their unquestionable duty to make women aware of both the risks and benefits as they relate to their individual pregnancy health. In fact ironically, it is you making categorical statements on safety: Birth is safe, interference is risky.

    I do understand the frustrations of many midwives who feel that there is too much intervention in hospitals, and I can appreciate why they want to be a voice for the women who are unhappy with their cesarean birth outcome. I simply ask that in delivering your argument, you are more careful to clarify the undeniable differences in outcomes between emergency and planned cesareans, and you resist the urge to criticize women who choose CDMR.

    Finally, I was disappointed to see that you did not address my comments regarding Holland, obesity outcomes and measuring infant mortality in my previous post, but in any case, I???d like to offer one more thought on this topic. In the UK, where home birth is an option for all women (in fact the government is actively promoting it as a birth choice), the numbers of women who actively make that choice are: Wales 3.53%, England 2.69%, Scotland 1.36% and Northern Ireland 0.39%. The truth is that the vast majority of women choose to give birth in a hospital.

    I think the one thing that we can agree on is that women are not homogeneous creatures. You would never choose a cesarean delivery and I would never choose a home birth. What is important going forward is for every pregnant woman???s choice to be supported where possible ??? and more than that - for it to be respected.

  • Posted By: midwifesue @ 02/28/2008 12:02:19 PM

    Comment: I I do not question the need for c-sections, nor do I question the fact that cesarean section is MAJOR SURGERY. I think it is amusing you say " that the rights of the unborn baby should be protected too (e.g. if medical professionals believe that a baby's health or even life will be placed at risk during a home birth due to particular health problems in the pregnancy)." YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, CESAREAN SURGERY HAS MORE RISKS TO MOM AND BABY THEN VAGINAL BIRTH, and yet, you support the womans right to choose inspite of the medical statistics. ACOG made the statement home birth is dangerous and should not be done. This statement is based on no reliable studies but women have trouble getting insurance to cover home birth because OB's say it is dangerous. So why DO YOU feel it is OK for and OB to advise a woman home birth is dangerous, but it is OK for an OB to tell a woman MAJOR SURGERY (c-section) is safe.

    I do acknowledge vaginal birth IN A HOSPITAL is becoming much more risky due to interventions. EVERY intervention ( ie, IV's, epidurals, prostaglandan's, pitocin) has associated risks. The bigest risk being an increased chance of needing a c-section! But women are not being told this when they enter the hospital and agree to interventions. If they question them, they are told it will be best for the baby. Do you think it is a coincidence more c-sections are done Monday to Friday between 9am and 5pm. The third leading cause of death in the US is hospital born infection. Who is more likely to develop an infection, someone with major surgery, or someone who has given birth vaginally? And better yet, someone who has given birth vaginally, at home.

    Recently, in the news, we heard of two a perfectly healthy women going to the hospital for inductions, and ending up dead (there are many more that were not news worthy.) We also saw the woman in Florida who went in for a normal vaginal birth, and ended up with no arms or legs because she contracted flesh eating skin disease from another patient in the hospital. Hospitals are not the safe place many people believe. Birth is not an illness. It is a normal, physiological process that USUALLY does not need controlling. Birth is safe, interference is risky. Yes, I am thankful we have hospitals where we can take our clients who are having trouble at home and NEED intervention.

    Judging from your title, I assume you are for elective c-sections. Well I guess so am I because I believe in a womans right to choose what she does with her body. AS LONG AS SCHEDULED C-SECTIONS ARE DONE ETHICALLY- AND WOMEN ARE GIVEN TRUE INFORMED CONCENT. Funny though, the risk of c-section for both mother and baby is MUCH higher then any potential risk home birth has but OB's push c-sections and say home birth is dangerous.
    Susan Scott Gill
    Licensed Midwife

  • Posted By: electivecesarean.com @ 02/26/2008 10:32:20 AM

    Comment: Continued...

    Finally, when measuring infant deaths, it is far more relevant (when measuring the risks and benefits associated with a specific delivery type) to look at perinatal* or neonatal** mortality rates (which measure deaths *from foetal viability (28 weeks gestation or 1,000g) until the end of 7th day after delivery, and **the first 4 weeks (or 27 days) of life) rather than infant mortality rates (which measure how many live newborns die in their first year of life). This is because infant mortality rates do not take incidences of stillbirth into account, and also there are social factors in the first year of life (that have nothing to do with the birth) which may play a role in the deaths.

    Pauline McDonagh Hull
    Editor, electivecesarean.com

  • Posted By: electivecesarean.com @ 02/26/2008 10:32:00 AM

    Comment: Susan, we certainly agree that waiting until 39 weeks EGA (unless there is a pressing medical need for an earlier delivery) is the safest course of action for healthy women who choose to have a cesarean. We also agree that women should be allowed to make choices in childbirth (whatever that choice may be). I would only add one caveat: that the rights of the unborn baby should be protected too (e.g. if medical professionals believe that a baby???s health or even life will be placed at risk during a home birth due to particular health problems in the pregnancy).

    However, with regards to some of the other points you make regarding mortality rates,
    I???m afraid I must highlight some research that you may not be aware of. First of all, the situation in Holland is really not the nirvana of maternity care that many midwives in the U.S. seem to think it is. Just last month I highlighted this in my BLOG (http://www.electivecesarean.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=373&Itemid=553) citing (among others) the 2008 research paper ???New choices needed in the care of pregnant women, Visser et al, 2008???, which reveals that ???the unique Dutch midwife system is under pressure.??? The perinatal mortality is no longer among the lowest in Europe and the maternal mortality rate has risen in the last 20 years, with more than 50% of cases being due to substandard care. And the cesarean rate there? It???s quoted as 15%... The World Health Organization???s ???ideal rate???.

    I also think you may want to consider other potential reasons for maternal mortality in the U.S. - besides cesarean delivery itself - and that is, the increasing rate of obesity here. Again, I???ve written about this extensively (this time in my online article); here is an extract from one of the pages: ???In 2004, a study looking at the UK's overall maternal mortality rate reported a risk of 0.01% (13.1 per 100,000 births), but of these women, ???35% were obese???; a prevalence ???50% more likely??? than the general population. (66, UK, 2004) A 2007 triennial update on the study confirmed this trend; deaths ???from cardiac causes, often linked to obesity, are now the commonest type.??? (531, UK, 2007) Morbidities have been found to be worse too. In North America, postpartum hospital confinement of obese women is ???significantly longer??? following a cesarean, (95, USA, 1994) (293, Canada, 2007) largely due to ???significantly increased??? risks for perioperative morbidity, (320, USA, 1994) (77, Canada, 2005) (96, USA, 1993) (113, UK, 1989) (293, Canada, 2007) such as antepartum venous thromboembolism, wound infection and anesthetic complications.
    http://www.electivecesarean.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=404&Itemid=1

  • Posted By: midwifesue @ 02/25/2008 10:10:14 PM

    Comment: The largest, randomized controlled study performed by the top epidemiologists in their field was published by the British Medical Journal (none of the US Medical publications were interested) and concluded home birth is as safe as hospital birth, with less intervention and a higher satisfaction rate.
    www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/330/7505/1416

    The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recently published a statement supporting homebirth for low risk women, again sighting similar outcomes to hospital birth but a higher satisfaction rate. www.rcm.org.uk/info/docs/Home%20Births_Joint%20Statement_1.pdf

    As the movie states, all other industrialized countries with better maternity outcomes then the USA, use midwives. In Holland, where the birth statistics are DRAMATICALLY better then the USA, 70% of women have home births.

    No woman should be forced to have a home birth. This is for people who have done their homework and decide it is what they want to do. The problem is in some states, it is illegal for them to do so. In other states it is legal, but women, who choose to do it, but end up transporting to the hospital, get treated horribly by many of the hospital staff (doctors & nurses.) Some insurance companies cover out of hospital birth, but some don???t. This is a woman???s rights issue and we ALL need to pay attention.
    Maybe homebirth isn???t for you, but do you believe in a woman???s right to choose?

    By the way, did you know the maternal death rate just went up in the US? We spend more money then any other industrialized nation, and we lose more moms and babies.

    Also, if any OB tells you it is perfectly safe and OK to schedule your c-section at 37 weeks, he/she is lying. Do your homework! As for celebrities discussing birth, I'm much more concerned when celebrities like Christina Aguilera are plastered on the front cover of People magazine discussing scheduling her d-section at 37 weeks because she didn't want to tear her vagina, and besides she was "done" being pregnant.

    According to WebMD
    Babies born by elective C-section before the 39th week of pregnancy have a three- to fourfold higher risk of breathing trouble than babies whose mothers have a normal vaginal delivery.
    Elective C-section babies also have a fivefold higher risk of needing mechanical breathing assistance for serious respiratory trouble, find Anne Kirkeby Hansen, MD, and colleagues at Denmark's Aarhus University Hospital.

    "Mothers who choose elective cesarean section should be aware that the risk of respiratory problems is four times raised at 37 weeks' gestation vs. full-term, intended vaginal delivery," Kirkeby Hansen tells WebMD. "The rate of respiratory problems is 10% for elective C-section at 37 weeks, but it is 2.8% for intended vaginal deliveries. That is why we say you should never do elective cesarean section at 37 weeks."
    Susan Scott Gill
    Licensed Midwife



  • Posted By: midwifesue @ 02/25/2008 9:39:21 PM

    Comment: towieur

  • Posted By: electivecesarean.com @ 02/25/2008 7:20:18 PM

    Comment: I appreciate that most advocates of home birth appreciate the need for an appropriate strategy in the event of an emergency, but for those people posting who insist on talking about "natural" always being best and the fact that women have been giving birth successfully for generations, I thought that the article extract below may be of interest to you.

    05 Dec 04 Can a home birth ever be 100% safe? Homing Instinct; Max Tomlinson talking to Mia Ogden, The Sunday Times
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/features/article399874.ece
    Max Tomlinson, widely considered to be the UK's leading naturopath and a staunch exponent of natural medicine, thought so. But here he explains how his beliefs almost cost the life of his son (who now has cerebral palsy)??? [He says:] ???When he finally emerged, he looked like he had been beaten up. One side of his head was so swollen, he had no neck, and his skull was squashed into a point??? [The] experience has been a terrible journey of guilt and expectation for us. I feel hugely guilty because it was my belief that home birth was the best way. If Filipa hadn???t met me, she would probably have gone through a normal birthing process in hospital. It was my influence that opened her thoughts to the idea of a home birth. We were so lacking: we were ready with the homeopathic side of things, but we weren???t prepared for an emergency. I hope others learn from this: always have a qualified midwife or a GP there, just in case. It???s madness to put your baby???s life at risk.???

    Pauline McDonagh Hull
    Editor, electivecesarean.com

  • Posted By: nick the greek @ 02/25/2008 6:32:07 AM

    Comment: cesarian is the goverments bigest social free heath enemy (higher cost than give a birth like a cow) , and newborns protecting angel (ask all those poor hipoxie paraplegics for THEIR opinion on the matter). if you are on a doubt ...She how most doctors wives give birth and do the same....... THEY KNOW WHY...NEWBORN HEALTH FIRST!!!!

  • Posted By: nick the greek @ 02/25/2008 6:29:57 AM

    Comment: cesarian is the goverments bigest social free heath enemy (higher cost than give a birth like a cow) , and newborns protecting angel (ask all those poor hipoxie paraplegics for THEIR opinion on the matter). if you are on a doubt ...She how most doctors wives give birth and do the same....... THEY KNOW WHY...NEWBORN HEALTH FIRST!!!!

  • Posted By: Nareyia @ 02/10/2008 4:53:48 PM

    Comment: I'm so happy to see this documentary! I think it should be all over the internet. On myspace, etc.
    I am a Doula/Labor Coach & Midwifes Assistant.
    And I've seen what happens to women in hospitals- whether they plan it carefully or not.
    It's a completely different experience at home of a birth center! Es

  • Posted By: Carmel7 @ 02/01/2008 3:34:33 PM

    Comment: Hail Riki pt 2 of 2
    The ones who 'know' how to take care of mothers and babies in birth are the homebirth midwives. They have knowledge and wisdom that has been passed down through countless generations since the beginning of time; Knowledge that we are now only beginning to understand through science. Birth is not a medical condition, yes there is blood and it hurts a bit but it is a normal process of life and should not need medical assistance. We don???t go to the hospital every month when we menstruate do we? Why should we go there to give birth? Each month we have a mini birth without a baby... the womb expels its contents and then heals up and grows a new lining. Nature knows how to do it perfectly. But what about complications and emergencies that arise during birth? The truth of the matter is??? MOST MEDICAL EMERGENCIES AND COMPLICATIONS THAT ARISE DURING HOSPITAL BIRTH ARE CAUSED BY THE HOSPITAL IN THE FIRST PLACE FROM ALL THE INTERVENTIONS. BIRTH IS A DELICATE FINE PROCESS THAT SHOULD NOT BE INTERFERED WITH. Yes we have a lower infant mortality rate than that of the 1900???s but it???s not so much due to more medicalised births than to improvements in general health, living standards, better hygiene etc. I advise all women to educate themselves, do their own research. Not in medical journals; you wont find it there (medical journals protect the medical industry). There are plenty of studies which prove the harmful effects of birth interventions, seek and you shall find. Watch Ricki Lake???s documentary, read Sheila Kitzinger, Michel Odent, Ina May Gaskin, to name but a few 'real' Birth Experts. To make a long story a little bit shorter... I had my second child in hospital three years later wearing an invisible suit of armor and with a 'do not touch me' sign etched on my forehead in invisible ink. They got the message... the experience was a little better. My third child was born at home three more years later. It was probably the most exhilarating, incredible and beautiful experience of my life. She is now 10yrs old, happy, healthy and full of self confidence, a quality I put down to the way she began her life, with a beautiful birth. The whole family still reflects with great affection the day she arrived into our world. I pray that in the future all women will have the opportunity to birth their babies their own way from the inside out, with the right kind of knowledge and support and with no interference.

  • Posted By: Carmel7 @ 02/01/2008 3:33:41 PM

    Comment: Hail Ricki pt. 1 of 2
    A documentary like this one is long overdue. It's about time the whole business of exploiting women at a most vulnerable time in their lives for profit and gain by the medical birthing industry is exposed. The best, most beautiful birth experience for any woman is not her obstetricians first priority, if it truly was, then they would be familiar with and recommending home birth. Getting the baby out, mother and baby still breathing and with all four limbs still attached along with doing everything they can to protect their reputation and make sure they are not sued is their priority, everything else is frills. Any great Doctors with impeccable integrity out there will not be offended by this because they know that in general it is true; That???s what birth has come to in this country. So, if a woman is satisfied with that then fine. But most women don???t know the difference (and most doctors don???t either). I have done both hospital and home birth and believe me they are incomparable. My first child was born in hospital and the experience was horrific. It took me years to get over it. I think I could liken it to rape actually, one of those date rapes where you've been drugged and you wake up next day having a vague recollection of what happened and you try to piece it together.. my body had been through one of the most incredible experiences available to us as humans and I was only allowed to be a passive spectator while someone took control and my body was used and 'done to'. I was young and vulnerable and had handed myself over to the people I thought knew how to best take care of me and my baby through birth. How wrong I was! The ones who 'know' how best to take care of mothers and babies during birth are a dying breed, they are being squeezed out by the medical industry through policies and politics in order to keep their giant share of that lucrative pie that the birthing industry is.

  • Posted By: critical_issuer @ 02/01/2008 1:09:50 PM

    Comment: I think that C-sections are something that are becoming an issue. I think that they should be done only when necessary and should not be able to be scheduled ahead of time unless the mother has health conditions that require her to have a baby normally. However, if the mother is healthy and wants to schedule it just because she thinks that she does not have any other time to have it because she is working should not be allowed. By doing this, she is risking her health and the health of her baby. I think that hospitals should not allow this to happen because if the mother is truly to busy to have a baby to have to schedule the birth then she should be having a baby anyways. How is she going to take care of it if she has to even schedule it???s birth even if it is going to be premature. I think that this should be stopped. That is only my opinion though.

  • Posted By: Happy Homebirther @ 01/31/2008 1:39:30 PM

    Comment: Thank you for an insightful article on this informative documentary. There are always two sides to every coin and each side will obviously think it is right; otherwise why would we do it?
    Each woman deserves the right to choose her course for birth, unfortunately some women are being denied that right. In Missouri, most women do not have the option of a Midwife attended home birth. We are being forced to deliver our babies in hospitals or ask the Midwife to commit a felony. For those of us who would like the option of having our babies at home with a legal, trained professional in attendance, this issue is not about saying other women are wrong for having their babies in hospitals, it's about having our right to choose the best possible birth attendant for our family. Home birth is not for everyone, just as hospital birth is not for everyone. Research has shown that planned home birth with a Midwife is as safe, if not safer, than a hospital birth and therefore this should be a viable option for those who want the Midwife Model of Care.

  • Posted By: AVAnd @ 01/31/2008 10:41:26 AM

    Comment: Very interesting topic.

    I had my first daughter a month ago. I was dead set on having her with no interventions - not even an IV. I am so thankful that my midwife drilled it into my head that trying to control my labor would not be productive and that having interventions was not a horrible thing. I ended up laboring at home (and at work) for 33 hours before going to the hospital. I had not slept and was so tired that I was losing my mental strength. I asked for nubain(spelled right?) to help me rest but it did little for me. Finally, after being at the hospital for about 3 hours, I asked for an epidural. When it finally kicked in, I was already at 10 cm! But it gave me moments to rest, which I desperately needed. The epidural was not what I imagined: I could still move my legs and feel parts of my lower body. Luckily I had practiced relaxation and focus techniques so that I could push her effectively. As my brilliant midwife had explained to me, my labor and the birth was not at all what I expected and I am so thankful that she helped me open my mind to interventions that helped me give birth to my daughter.

    I wonder what would have happened had I not been mentally preparing myself for a birth without intervention? While I did have the epidural, I relied on my "training" to help me give birth. Towards the end, the doctor on duty came in and introduced herself and explained that we may need to do a C-section. My midwife (who was with me the entire time) advocated for me to have the chance to try pushing and with her guidance, we delivered a healthy baby (I'm doing well too!). Without having "trained" for a birth without intervention, I suspect I would have been afraid and given up.

    Birth is overwhelming no matter the circumstances. Feeling powerful and surrendering were very important for me to have a vaginal birth - but those feelings were not possible without being surrounded by people who believed in me and who I trusted.

    Just another thought: no one asked me if I was excited to give birth when I was pregnant. However, I was asked if I was scared, told to have an epidural, and patronized for wishing to do it with no intervention. It is almost as if our culture has devalued women's wisdom and the sisterhood of our experiences in birth.

  • Posted By: AVAnd @ 01/31/2008 10:40:40 AM

    Comment: Very interesting topic.

    I had my first daughter a month ago. I was dead set on having her with no interventions - not even an IV. I am so thankful that my midwife drilled it into my head that trying to control my labor would not be productive and that having interventions was not a horrible thing. I ended up laboring at home (and at work) for 33 hours before going to the hospital. I had not slept and was so tired that I was losing my mental strength. I asked for nubain(spelled right?) to help me rest but it did little for me. Finally, after being at the hospital for about 3 hours, I asked for an epidural. When it finally kicked in, I was already at 10 cm! But it gave me moments to rest, which I desperately needed. The epidural was not what I imagined: I could still move my legs and feel parts of my lower body. Luckily I had practiced relaxation and focus techniques so that I could push her effectively. As my brilliant midwife had explained to me, my labor and the birth was not at all what I expected and I am so thankful that she helped me open my mind to interventions that helped me give birth to my daughter.

    I wonder what would have happened had I not been mentally preparing myself for a birth without intervention? While I did have the epidural, I relied on my "training" to help me give birth. Towards the end, the doctor on duty came in and introduced herself and explained that we may need to do a C-section. My midwife (who was with me the entire time) advocated for me to have the chance to try pushing and with her guidance, we delivered a healthy baby (I'm doing well too!). Without having "trained" for a birth without intervention, I suspect I would have been afraid and given up.

    Birth is overwhelming no matter the circumstances. Feeling powerful and surrendering were very important for me to have a vaginal birth - but those feelings were not possible without being surrounded by people who believed in me and who I trusted.

    Just another thought: no one asked me if I was excited to give birth when I was pregnant. However, I was asked if I was scared, told to have an epidural, and patronized for wishing to do it with no intervention. It is almost as if our culture has devalued women's wisdom and the sisterhood of our experiences in birth.

  • Posted By: shanarn @ 01/30/2008 3:28:02 AM

    Comment: I am not saying there is anything wrong with having a natural childbirth. Power to the mothers who want to have their babies that way. However, as a Labor and Delivery nurse, I know that sometimes a cesarean section is necessary. Most doctors and nurses are truly looking out for the best interests of the mothers and babies, contrary to what this article is stating. Many different factors can lead to a c-section, such as severe preeclampsia, shoulder dystocia, pelvic disproportion, maternal fever, fetal tachycardia or bradycardia, cord prolapse, HELLP Syndrome, placental abruption, uterine rupture, breech presentation, placenta previa, etc, etc, etc. The list goes on and on. Doctors and Nurses are educated to be aware of these potential life-threatening problems. The lay person is not! Like I said before, I am all for a natural delivery. However, it is not always in the mothers or babies best interest. It is very dangerous for people to suggest otherwise. I have a friend who decided to deliver her fourth baby at home. You could ask her what she thinks of home delivery now. Her baby died during childbirth and she came very close to dying herself. Oh, wait, but home delivery is just as safe or safter as hospital deliveries according to many of the people who have written in. Whatever.

    • Posted By: shanonmom @ 01/30/2008 10:57:39

      Comment: You can compare apples to apples. I know women who died in childbirth or their babies were lost in a hospital setting during a "normal" delivery or what would have been a normal delivery. So many factors that "could" lead to a cesarean simply don't when care is managed appropriately. One of the most frustrating moments I have is when women are told they have to induce or have to have a cesarean because I see comments like an RN commenting on possibly INDICATED (and possibly iatrogenic) cesareans and simply ignoring the massive amount of unnecessary medical intervention going on in this country. We're speaking different languages because hospitals don't understand low risk care or appropriate transfer. I'm sorry your friend lost her child but it makes me wonder what the circumstances were and if the loss was due to the care she received. Appropriate investigation and comment rather than "babies die at homebirths" because honestly, the woman who had an unnecessary induction at St Joseph's Hospital in Tampa and died earlier this year probably wouldn't think much of hospital birth, either.

  • Posted By: Anymouse @ 01/30/2008 2:45:24 AM

    Comment: I'll bet there isn't a record of a single cabbie anywhere in this countr that has lost a baby, -or a mother-, through a C-section, a major surgery with all the complications of an appendectomy.

  • Posted By: simon22 @ 01/29/2008 10:58:18 PM

    Comment: My son is 6 years old he cant talk and cant walk. He has what they call cortical visual impairment. He is spastic quadriplegic ....why? ONE REASON - my wife (who would have preferred a C-section) was not given one. Her doctor put her through 49+ hours of labor (7 and 1/2 that were fully dialated). My son had massive seizures the next day as well and will never have quality of life. The article above is nothing but dribble. The best way to have a baby is the safest way. I asked my sons attorney (we are suing for his cares only) how many cases hes had where complications resulted from C-section mistakes. He replied - NONE. And this is one of the top attorneys in this category in the country. Rikki lake wasnt even overly impressive as a talk show host.....how does she think she can be an authority here. I wish we were a fluke case but I know 3 other families in a similar situation within 15 minutes of my home. All had healthy babies before their natural childbirths. It would be nice to have some stats on NATURAL vs. C-section mishaps....problem is most hospitals will protect the insurance companies and their staff so ....instead you''ll get to read the Rikki Lake dribble (I am glad for her that her baby is OK though). Mothers....make sure you advocate for yourself...if you've pushed fully dialated for over 3 hours and your not getting a Csection you may have picked the wrong doctor......like us.

    • Posted By: Anymouse @ 01/30/2008 02:25:24

      Comment: I feel for you. And so many obst3tricians get sued over things that are beyond their control, that are in the hands of God, as they say. But the bottom line is the US does the most Cesarians, has the highest infant/maternal mortality rate, and the info IS available from every State health board, and the Federal government, ant the World Health Organization, and the AMA itself.

      • Posted By: Carmel7 @ 02/01/2008 14:08:02

        Comment: My heart goes out to you and your family, victims of the modern birthing industry. I think you have missed the whole point of Ricki Lake???s documentary and this article which is about making an informed choice, including the option to choose a natural birth which we know little of nowadays. A normal natural birth has nothing to do with doctors, medicine or hospital beds, a normal natural birth involves the woman as an active participant in birthing her baby, responding to her instinctive urges to move this way or that in order to facilitate the opening of her body to expel the baby. A normal birth has nothing to do with a mother lying on her back in a bed or sitting on her tailbone (which has to move out of the way in order for the pelvis to open fully to let the baby through without damaging the mother or baby) or strapped to monitors or any other type of equipment. All a healthy birthing woman needs is a quiet private space and the loving support of people who care about her and baby. Emergency medical back up such as those wonderful birth ambulances found in Holland (where most babies are born at home) would be all that is needed to complete the picture. Birth is a very delicate physiological process that medical science does not even fully understand. We do know that there is a symphony of hormones being released in the mother???s body which contract her uterus, soften and open her pelvis, protect her baby and all the while produce natural pain relieving endorphins in response to each contraction. She has everything she needs to fulfil the task at hand. Nature knows how to do it perfectly, just as bird eggs hatch and flowers grow. The problem is that the very first medical intervention in this process inhibits it and can even stop it in its tracks. In your wife???s case, she had gotten on the medical train, which, once taken does not go back, so yes, I agree, she should have been offered caesarean surgery and it could have prevented the damage to the baby. Not because she was so long in labour (I know of natural births that lasted 2 whole days and were easy and beautiful resulting in a healthy, happy mother and baby), but because she was having a medical birth. You cannot have a natural birth which is medically managed; they are two completely different processes. A natural birth occasionally turns into a medical birth but a medical birth will never be a natural one. Once you take the medical train you must be prepared to stop at all the stations along the way even the caesarean one. I am sorry it is too late for any of what I am saying here to be of any use to you now to help your son, but perhaps it might help you and your wife come to terms with what happened. You must not blame yourselves or even your doctor; we are all victims of the times we live in where we have completely lost our trust in nature.

  • Posted By: simon22 @ 01/29/2008 10:41:41 PM

    Comment: Nice article from Rikki and the nations top insurance executives. My son is 6 years old and has spastic quadripligia. Even though my wife would have preferred a C-section, she didnt get one. She pushed valiantly for 7hours and 15 minutes fully dialated. He had massive seizures the next day....he still gets them. He is a little fighter but has very little quality of life. There is nothing wrong with natural childbirth but overhyping it is irresponsible

    • Posted By: shanonmom @ 01/30/2008 11:04:13

      Comment: I'm sorry you had malpractice and a bad care provider. I hope you won your lawsuit. However, this doesn't make homebirth unsafe. What would have happened in a homebirth situation in many cases would have been appropriate transfer when they realized something was not working. If the doctors were ethical, they would have then given your wife a cesarean. However, we can't stop unethical doctors from practicting in many cases. Your situation is a great indicator of why women need care providers trained to actually understand pregnancy rather than surgeons who are too busy to give time and appropriate care.

  • Posted By: mightymse17 @ 01/29/2008 9:54:48 PM

    Comment: The author of this Newsweek article seems to misconstrue and misrepresent study information, propagating the misleading data discussed in the journal. Go to: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/bmj.39363.706956.55v1 to read professional, peer responses; http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/bmj.39363.706956.55v1 for the actual journal article. It is a shame that so many people will be dumber for reading Newsweek.

  • Posted By: anonymo @ 01/29/2008 8:55:15 PM

    Comment: We consider more premature children "children", than in the other countries. Our infant morality rate is higher because we consider more prematurely born fetuses children, whereas in other countries, a second trimester birth is considered a "spontaneous abortion", and medical technology is not utilized to try to save the premature infant. It is not because of c-sections that we have a higher infant mortality rate, it is because our our definition of the word "infant" .

    • Posted By: Kbudds @ 01/29/2008 23:17:50

      Comment: So after that baby was born - YOU would be able to kill it, calling it abortion??? Wow!

    • Posted By: Kbudds @ 01/29/2008 23:14:59

      Comment: So after that baby was born - YOU would be able to kill it, calling it abortion??? Wow!

    • Posted By: akp714 @ 01/29/2008 21:40:15

      Comment: Exactly.

      • Posted By: anonymo @ 01/30/2008 00:52:29

        Comment: NO, what I was implying is that in other countries the premature children born can't be saved, they don't have the technology to do so. Medical personnel don't consider their lives savable enough because they don't have extra intensive care unit supplies, nurses, ECMO, special ventilators, among other things. We are pushing the limits of technology and mother nature keeping extreme premies alive. I don't think those births are considered live, viable humans in other countries and don't get counted as part of the infant mortaility rate, they are considered to all be mortal.

  • Posted By: akp714 @ 01/29/2008 8:25:25 PM

    Comment: As a future doctor, I am disheartened to see some of the comments here. Your doctor's are working in your baby's and your own best interests. If anything is working againsts that, it's likely due to the years of lawsuits brought against obstetricians from pursuing vaginal deliveries. If doctors wanted to be in the business of making money, they would have gone into business.

    • Posted By: shanonmom @ 01/30/2008 11:01:03

      Comment: I read this and couldn't help but wonder how long you will make it in medicine if this is your attitude. Doctors DID go into business, which is why VBAC's are being banned across the country. It's easier to do a repeat cesarean than it is to sit next to a woman's bedside. Just ask them.

    • Posted By: mightymse17 @ 01/29/2008 22:05:17

      Comment: Don't you think that is a slight hasty generalization? While the doctors you may come in contact with in your pre-medical or medical studies may be nearly altruistic, evidence suggests otherwise. i do admire your attitude though, don't let that go no matter how much your mortgage payment is.

  • Posted By: akp714 @ 01/29/2008 8:18:27 PM

    Comment: As a future doctor, I am so disheartened by the uneducated, inaccurate comments made here. Bottom line: Doctors are working for your's and your baby's best interests. If it's anything less, it's likely do to avoidance of a lawsuit, malpractice insurance co., and lawyers who have disrupted the process. And when someone has an epidural or surgery, the patient must consent. I know no doctor that would do a c-section if it wasn't right for the patient. If doctors were in the business of making money, they would have gone into business.

    • Posted By: Anymouse @ 01/29/2008 20:30:36

      Comment: I'll bite: why does our nation have the highest neonatal death rate and maternal death rate in the industrialized world if medicalizing a natural process which required no doctors for 100,000's years? I also refer you, Sir, to the CIA World Factbook entry on the United States - I certainly trust them better than the AMA - the CIA is not into obstetrics for the money.

      • Posted By: akp714 @ 01/29/2008 21:38:10

        Comment: First of all, I'm not a sir.

        Secondly, I stand by the fact that doctors only attempt to optimize patient care.

        • Posted By: Anymouse @ 01/30/2008 02:34:43

          Comment: My apologies . . . I stand by the fact mothers aren't patients. Pregnancy and birth aren't diseases, and if humans needed phydsicians in the normal course of evolution, we'd've been extinct long ago. The majority of births progress fine without intervention, and obstetrics is an over-manned (or womaned) field . . . as is law, and they are both driven by the same thing - $$$

        • Posted By: Kbudds7 @ 01/29/2008 23:33:31

          Comment: It is really naive of you to think such things- If they haven't informed you in med school yet, being a doctor is a business! Women need a service and doctors provide that. Funny how you preach about people being uneducated- look 'business' up in the dictionary! And by the way, not all people are good- including doctors.

          • Posted By: anonymo @ 01/30/2008 00:59:45

            Comment: As a doctor, I can tell you that there is a business of medicine, but doctors are not taught the "business of medicine" in medical school, or in residency. They are taught the "profession" of medicine, which binds them to the many altruistic principals. The business of medicine convolutes this issue, as insurance and government continurally squeeze reimbursements, and attorneys and juries award huge awards, some doctors have trouble seeing the business and the profession and allow themselves to do what's right for the patient. As we get more technologically advanced, decision-making itself becomes more and more difficult, and "right" and "wrong" are not the only answers to most medical situations. It is the assimilation of much information the doctor must do to decide what is "best" in each circumstance, and the patients have more and more input, as they supposedly get more informed through the internet and media.

            • Posted By: Anymouse @ 01/30/2008 03:08:47

              Comment: The ones that don't pay attention to business go out of business, just like a restaurant or auto shop. In this country if a physician is not in it for the $$$, they will not be in it at all. Just fill in a new patient form, where one of the first questions asked is "What is your insurance company?"

  • Posted By: Anymouse @ 01/29/2008 7:50:34 PM

    Comment: My son was born at home in 1988 in Virginia Beach. At the time I was in the Navy. My wife and I had requested health statistics from the Commonwealth of Virginia on maternal/neonatal death rates for all facilities in Tidewater. The Naval Hospital was worst, Va Beach Gen. was most expensive. Of thousands of births the midwifery clinic had recorded 0/0 deaths, and were least expensive.

    Some elements in my command gave me pressure against the midwife, suggesting I was putting my wife at risk and threatening military legal action. CHAMPUS (now Tricare), military health insurance, pays for midwives as outpatient care (in accordance with the benefits manual) but the Tidewater area programme was overseen by an obstetrician who routinely refused claims for midwives, even though the average cost in Va Beach to the taxpayer (Champus is part of the Dept. of Defense) was 1/10th that of a regular delivery in a hospital.

    My wife gave birth in about seven hours, and retired to her own waterbed with her new son, to bond with him. It took a letter to Congress to get Champus to cough up their share of the bill. Midwives after all are a threat to obstetricians - their existence proves that medical intervention in birth is abnormal.

    He is now ninteen, and preparing for University. Supposing all those medications and interventions and insurance billing schemes were applied? Where would he be now? How much pain and suffering and waste of medical resources would be alliviated by letting a natural process be natural instead of treating it as a disorder? Is womanhood a disorder that needs to be treated on the altar of the AMA? Along with the occasional human sacrifice?

  • Posted By: unnamedmother @ 01/29/2008 7:35:44 PM

    Comment: my daughter was also born via c-section, yes i would have preferred an vaginal delivery, but i was prepared to do whatever was necessary to insure her health...the doctors recommended the c-section, and i will never regret it. its not as bad as it is put off to be, and it should not be your #1 concern when you're are pregnant, your baby's health should be! i don't know people make it such a big deal, having a c-section is not the end of the world!

  • Posted By: valspring @ 01/29/2008 7:30:59 PM

    Comment: Do any of these documentaries or studies take into account the fact that insurance companies won't allow you to give birth vaginally if you've already had a c-section? I had an emergency c-section due to hypertention with my first pregnancy. This was to save both me and my son. He did end up with respiratory problems which were quickly resolved. Elective c-sections aren't always truly elective. I will be having another c-section in three weeks. I scheduled the date less than a week before my due date. I'm hoping to make it that far. I'm not a selfish mother who schedules my life away. I am a stay-at-home. I get angrier and angrier every time I am critisized, along with so many other women, for having c-sections. Most of us would not choose to go through major surgery or the long, horrible recovery. One more thing: The "birthing experience" is not what is important. It is having the baby. Real mothers don't go through pregnacy for the experience. They go through it to have a child.

    • Posted By: Anymouse @ 01/30/2008 14:45:34

      Comment: No matter what sort of care giver you have (Nurse-Midwife or Physician), if your care-giver indicates a particular course of action and your insurance company threatens not to cover you when the procedure is covered (vaginal or C-section), there are really only two things to do: report them to the insurance commissioner of your state for breach-of-contract and practicing medicine without a license (a crime), and get a good lawyer to sue them for the same. This goes for any recommended medical treatment, not just OB. It is not the insurance company's job to assess your state of health, but your OB/GYN or Midwife, and some pencil-pushing pinhead can (and they have) go to jail for practicing medicine. Insurance companies have -much- deeper pockets than Physicians, and of those I know who have done this (including my Mom for an emergency surgery to repair a brain aneurysm the insurance folk said was -elective- surgery), the threat was all it took.

  • Posted By: anacristina @ 01/29/2008 7:05:50 PM

    Comment: my daughter was delivered by c-section in 1991 because the placenta was "getting too old" and my baby was "overdue" 3 weeks. they induced the labor in the a.m. and i had the terrible contractions during the day. since i wasn't dilating past 3or 4 cm, they gave me an epidural and waited til night for a doctor to see me. when he came, he broke my water bag and i remained like that til the next morning when they took me in for surgery. 5 years later, pregnant w/my second baby my dr. said that since i had a history of not dilating,and my baby was already over 8 lbs.(too big for my 5' 1" ht.), i should consider c- section. remembering the trauma of induced labor pain, i ceded. my labor wasn't induced and i went straight to surgery. now, 10 yrs. later expecting my third baby, a new o.b. told me on my first prenatal care visit that i will have to have a c-section. he has yet to explain exactly why. he happens to be a high-risk pregnancy o.b. (a fact i wasn't aware of) and seemed to suggest that although i have no medical problems(high b.p., diabetes, etc.) my obesity is the main deciding factor. i'm unsure i really need the c-section.

    • Posted By: akp714 @ 01/29/2008 20:29:21

      Comment: After a c-section, a woman has a 5% chance of her uterus rupturing during labor in the next pregnancy. Well it's, yes, just 5%, if it does happen the baby likely dies and the mother also has a very high likelihood of dying. Why? Because you will lose an immense amount of blood.

      • Posted By: Anymouse @ 01/29/2008 20:45:56

        Comment: Disregarding the fact the majority of C-sections in this country are caused by intervention as opposed to letting a normal process proceed normally, what recent credible large studies can you cite to support this figure?

  • Posted By: terra @ 01/29/2008 6:24:49 PM

    Comment: my daughter was born caesarian, but certainly not by my choice. she was fine. i went in because of decreased fetal movement. they monitored me for a few hours and told me she was fine. her heart beat was fine, she wasn't stressed, but they didn't let me go home. instead they kept telling me "better out, than in". i was by myself, my husband was at work. nurses were drawing blood and 3 doctors were in the room talking about surgery, i was young and scared. i couldn't tell you how i ended up in the operating room, only to know, after all was said and done, that i didnt need the c-section and she could have been a natural birth a month later. so i feel that part of the high caesarian rate is because of doctor's stressing out patients for unneeded procedures.

  • Posted By: terra @ 01/29/2008 6:18:48 PM

    Comment: my daughter was born caesarian, but certainly not by my choice. she was fine. i went in because of decreased fetal movement. they monitored me for a few hours and told me she was fine. her heart beat was fine, she wasn't stressed, but they didn't let me go home. instead they kept telling me "better out, than in". i was by myself, my husband was at work. nurses were drawing blood and 3 doctors were in the room talking about surgery, i was young and scared. i couldn't tell you how i ended up in the operating room, only to know, after all was said and done, that i didnt need the c-section and she could have been a natural birth a month later. so i feel that part of the high caesarian rate is because of doctor's stressing out patients for unneeded procedures.

  • Posted By: blessedw/2boys @ 01/29/2008 5:54:13 PM

    Comment: Both my boys were delivered via c-section (19 1/2 months apart). My first was an emergency, as I was in labor for 3 days and did not progress past 4 cm. His heart rate was also dipping. My second was born c-section and not VBAC as I developed an umbilical hernia and it was risky to chance a normal birth. Am I disappointed that I didn't have natural births? You bet - but had I not, I'm sure that I'd be having other things to worry about than having been cut open.
    I can't believe these Hollywood and music stars having elective c-sections. It hurts like hell to recover, and I think it's the "lazy" way out. To me it's certainly not a cool thing to do. Medically necessary - yes. But "cosmetically"? - no way!!!!!

  • Posted By: taylortwin @ 01/29/2008 5:35:05 PM

    Comment: I

  • Posted By: lovinmommyhood @ 01/29/2008 5:34:02 PM

    Comment: I do believe I start most of my comments with the following word: "OY" People, there are good reasons for "natural" childbirth. There are good reasons for "assisted" or "augmented" birth. There are good reasons for surgical intervention. There are even good reasons for scheduled c-sections. What there is no good reason for is undue danger, stress, pain, medication, or expense for any party. I think that is the whole point. I think we've come to believe as a society that everything is open to discussion. Here's one truth there is no way to get around: getting a kid from womb to world is gonna hurt. Period. I've had two kids, got another coming in a couple months. I had a 38-hour labor with the first that would have been a c-section at the first blip of my daughter's heart rate. I made the mistake of going to the hospital too early. They felt the need to augment my labor with pitocin, which made for very painful contractions and made it very hard for me to relax. I had an epidural the second I was 4 cm because it took 26 hours to get there and I had 2 more to progress or go under the knife. With my 2nd, I had a 55-hour (no kidding) labor, had to good sense to stay out of the hospital and on my feet for as long as I could, did fine, and delivered 2 hours after I got to the hospital with no augmentation. That said, I have had more than my share of friends with horror stories about baby getting stuck in the birth canal, even with full epesiotomy, breaking baby's collar bone, only to shove baby back up the birth canal and have a c-section. Or of a woman who has a rare allergy to most anasthetics and narcotics, so she knew drugs would have to be used in a life-or-death situation only--because there was a good chance she WOULD die, even with proper care. Or of a woman attempting a VBAC only to have her uterus rupture, and her life and her baby's saved by the quick actions of the doctor literally grabbing a scalpel and cutting the baby out of her, nicking the baby's shoulder in the process. SOOO....there is a place and time for pretty much everything, when it comes to childbirth...EXCEPT DOING THINGS STRICTLY FOR CONVENIENCE. There is nothing convenient about having a baby. Want convenience? Get a goldfish.

  • Posted By: einzeit @ 01/29/2008 4:30:59 PM

    Comment: The article stated that everyone agrees C-section is neccessary in certain cases. However, I agree that the perception people have of birth, more of a medical situation than a natural procedure, needs to be more open. I have always thought hollywood has been a little over the top with birth scenes. It can be a good laugh, but it does change people's perception as well. I believe people use the drugs too often and too soon; that they just assume that every birth needs an epidural, etc. That the pregnant woman has been indoctrinated to think it is necessary to have a successful vaginal birth. As I was sitting on a bench in the mall a woman sat down beside me and told me the first thing I should do when I got to the hospital was ask for those drugs, not to be one of those 'tough' women and try to do it natural! Well I didn't tell her I had no intention of using anything. Today, however, I would be more outspoken having gone through two births without anything. A few friends have said that their pregnancies had been moving along and the nurses had commented it wouldn't be long and then they received their epidurals and the labor seemed to just quit. I just don't think people realise they don't have to have one. Intervention can be neccessary, but it should not be the norm, the ritual. I had a low lying placenta during my first birth and a chunk broke off during a contraction. My water had not broken yet, so they did intervene to tear the sac to avoid undue stress. However, they wanted to brake my friends shortly after arriving just to hurry it along. Fortunately she was strong enough to say let's wait and it broke by itself within twenty minutes. I had another friend who started throwing up hours before and had a miserable birth experience, I do believe it became a c-section. To those who are having a normal pregnancy and are otherwise healthy I'd ask you to really look at non-intervention, it can actually make for a more comfortable birth! (Possibly a quicker one, and no unneccessary after effects. I have another friend who had pain for years at the spot in her back where she got her epidural.)

  • Posted By: kierstensmomma @ 01/29/2008 4:29:48 PM

    Comment: i was 19 when i delivered my daughter by ceasarean. but i fell under one of those health risks, i had contracted genital herpes from her father while i was pregnant. even still knowing i was going to be facing the c-section, i didn't get to pick when i was "due". i am fortunate i had a doctor who stood strong at all my complaints about pain and when i thought i should deliver being as how i was due new years day. i remember so clear him telling me he had 12 women due from christmas to new years that year, and he didnt care whos husband, mother, sister would be home that he would let them have their babies when it was the right medical time and i was one of them that would have to just let life be the boss. my ob-gyn had 6 children of his own, which he had delivered, and had been practicing for a good 25-30 years before i came into his office,so he was an intelligent man who i am grateful to have had for a doctor. i believe as long as you have doctors like i did (just so you know we didnt always agree on everything either) they wouldnt even bend to the pressure of "convience" or even the health ins $$ business. i agree very firmly that a c-section should be used for the upmost emergency reasons. ill tell you personally it was no walk in the park; learning to walk again, not being able to cough w/o crying which also hurt, not to forget the beautiful scars we get, not being able to lean over and pick up my baby and having to call someone to hand her to me and yes, the huge bill thats left over. altogether i believe my bill was easily over 60,000 for 4 days for my daughter and i, w/ her in ICU due to other issues. i for the life of me cant see how someone would prefer this over a "natural"birth. me i would have rather had an epidural and had a part of my daughters birth instead of lying there, what i would describe as, feeling helpless while everyone rushed around me. but i guess to each their own, i mean its their money, their bodies, their doctors and for god's sake ... their child they are assuming the cost for!

  • Posted By: mrsavizdrav @ 01/29/2008 4:24:33 PM

    Comment: I had a C-section because I lost all the amniotic fluid and my baby was breach. That was not what I wanted but I didn't want to have a premature baby either, and it happened. We can't choose when and how will our babies be born. Having a C-section because it is convenient is wrong, very wrong.

  • Posted By: kelp33 @ 01/29/2008 4:07:30 PM

    Comment: I question the very statistics quoted in the report ...

    "The risk of death for infants delivered via C-section???who are more likely to have a low birth weight???was double that of vaginal births, and C-section babies were more likely to have respiratory problems. "

    Is the risk of death higher simply because babies born via C-section are more likely to be premature, breach or have other risk factors. My son was born 2 months early via C-section and weighed just over 4lbs. He would certainly fit those catagories but he was breech, in distress and wouldn't have survived if he wasn't born C-section.

    The study findings prompt more questions than answers.

    • Posted By: Anymouse @ 01/29/2008 20:26:49

      Comment: These statistics might get your attention then. According to the Central Ingtelligency Agency "World Fact Book 2007" ( http://www.odci.gov ) The United States has the highest infant mortality rate in the industrialized world, and is the only industrial country not to have a State-supported midwifery system.

      Some statistics from the World Fact Book: deaths per 1000: USA: 6.37, United Kingdom 5.01, Denmark 4.45, Iceland 3.12 - the numbers march on. Premature babies die more often, and C-sections are routinely scheduled prematurely. Our own Federal government's figures show the medical system for women in this country is really a sham, yet they continue to allow MEN to tell them there is something wrong with their bodies and allow themselves to be lead to the OR - the doc gets paid by your insurance whether you live through the surgery or not.

  • Posted By: Juliet0225 @ 01/29/2008 4:03:32 PM

    Comment: Jen123, you're right. All pregnant women need to be prepared for anything to happen in labor, and that includes unnecessary medical intervention. I encourage everyone to become more educated on labor and birth--normal, natural labor and birth--and to relay on that knowledge to make decisions that expectant parents are comfortable with, and will be ultimately *solely* responsible for. (Doctors are just people, and they can--and do--make mistakes. We can't rely on their signular opinions and expertise to make our choices for us).

    • Posted By: jwshowpigs @ 01/29/2008 16:18:00

      Comment: Drs. in our area will tell you flat out if you don't do it my way find another dr. and all the other drs are the same...with the same views. So you don't have much of any say in the matter.

  • Posted By: kokapellie @ 01/29/2008 3:45:11 PM

    Comment: this is about elective c-sections. 19 year old girls with no health problems and a healthy baby who simply dont want to attempt natural birth. in many cases, c-sections are necessary, and, as the article says, save lives. ten pound children probably shouldnt be delievered vaginally. twins it is probaby a good idea to go c-section. and they never said anything about children being born by c-section were bad, so i dont know where you would have come up with "i hope you dont mena they should not have been born?" that is a stupid, uneducated, hasty and reactionary reply. no need to get offensive because someone else thinks that maybe not cutting a baby out of his/her mother so abruptly is a bad idea.

    • Posted By: facmom @ 01/29/2008 18:57:12

      Comment: for kokapellie: the comment about "should not have been born" was in reply to a previous comment made about God wanting us to have children naturally. If you can do it, go ahead, but don't expect everyone to think they can and should deliver vaginally and therby put ideas in 19 y/old heads about not wanting ot needing medical intervention when deemed necessary by circumstances. 19 year olds should be well versed on prevention rather than be having babies at such a young age.

    • Posted By: jwshowpigs @ 01/29/2008 16:02:18

      Comment: I believe she was replying to a comment made, not the article.

  • Posted By: tehanismom @ 01/29/2008 3:44:02 PM

    Comment: oh come on now...so some people need and require c-sections, other do not want or need it, and some who don't need it, want it. just do what's best for yourself and the baby. not just what's easiest, or more convenient. i, myself delivered naturally,on 3 hours of sleep, no drugs or anything, to a healthy 8.13 pound baby girl, and it was tough. but my baby was worth it and i gave it my all that night. it was the most awesome sacrifice of my life and i'm proud of myself for doing so.

  • Posted By: bryanv82 @ 01/29/2008 3:33:10 PM

    Comment: Personally I much prefer women that don't have kids at all because it's more sexy, however, if a woman can't resist having kids she should at least have a c-section. C-sections save some of the tightness of the vagina and I love tight vaginas!

    • Posted By: tehanismom @ 01/29/2008 16:06:17

      Comment: fine, you've got your preference. law of attraction...if you're seeking a woman who prefers not to have kids, would opt for a c-section to spare her vagina, then you'll get her....because that girl is probably looking for a boy just like you to call her own. happy hunting!

    • Posted By: jwshowpigs @ 01/29/2008 15:42:33

      Comment: Then I guess you shouldn't be here, since your mom shouldn't have had kids...

  • Posted By: bryanv82 @ 01/29/2008 3:31:18 PM

    Comment: Personally I much prefer women that don't have kids but if they feel the need to have kids they should at least have a c-section. C-sections help to save the tightness of the vagina and I love tight vaginas!

    • Posted By: elisa32 @ 01/31/2008 07:31:58

      Comment: You have no place here, your opinion is irrelevant.

    • Posted By: mrsavizdrav @ 01/29/2008 16:13:57

      Comment: You are sick!

  • Posted By: irongirl @ 01/29/2008 3:27:05 PM

    Comment: This is a culture where people think a woman should have the "right" to abort her baby, but not the "right" to choose whether she wants/needs a c-section or not.

  • Posted By: rfuller92055 @ 01/29/2008 3:14:22 PM

    Comment: If it weren't for a c-section, my twins and I would not be here. Thank you, c-section! I'd do it again in a heartbeat.

  • Posted By: facmom @ 01/29/2008 3:12:38 PM

    Comment: I think this is all well and good if you can have a "normal" delivery. I tried twice and both times ended up having c-sections. My children are both fine and I did remarkably well (I left the hospital on the 3rd day after the c-section). Both my doctors and I agreed that a vaginal delivery was the way to go. Then I got gestational diabetes and had fetal distress with my first pregnancy, so that ended up in my first c-section. I tried for a v-bac with my second pregnancy, but again the diabetes returned and my daughter was about 10 lbs at birth. Being a petite woman, my doctors suggested that I would have a very hard time delivering vaginally, also because of the fact that she wasn't positioned properly. So that decided the second c-section. I was very happy with the outcome of both operations (healthy children), and I did not mind taking a bit longer to recuperate from their births. I feel that it was a good choice for me at the time, and I don't feel in any way guilty for not "going natural". I think this is a very personal choice for each woman, and each should not be pushed or coerced into going one way or another by their doctor, or a documentary, or society in general.

  • Posted By: workinggirl911@hotmail.com @ 01/29/2008 2:49:01 PM

    Comment: I had a vaginal birth with my first child, who is now 12. I had a c-section with my now almost 11 year old because my amniotic fluid leaked out and I did not have enough to turn the baby (she was trying to come out knee and elbow first). I didn't think I would ever have any more babies but I met a wonderful man and he didn't have any children of his own. I got pregnant and didn't realize there would even be a question of me delivering vaginally. I was told by the ob/gyn that I chose that I would only be able to deliver by c-section because of my previous delivery. I said that was 9 years ago!!! the way she explained it was that unless I had a perfect family medical history no doctor in my area would even consider a V-BAC. I resigned to the fact that this was my fate and stayed with that dr. for 6 months. But every day the thought would haunt me about me not having the right to choose how to have my baby, If a woman can choose whether she WANTS to have a baby or not, she should be able to choose HOW she delivers it. So I started to do my own investigative work on the risks and benefits of a V-BAC. The information I found was astounding!!! Especially if you have had a vaginal birth before, the possiblity of you delivering vagainally again are great!!! I looked into drs that were an hour away from me, I even looked into midwives so I could have the baby at home. I finally found a dr only 20 minutes away who would consider doing a V-BAC. I told him I just want the chance to TRY. If there is a complication and a c-section is necessary, then by all means we do it. But I really belived I could deliver vaginally if given the opportunity. I also found out that with a V-BAC the dr. has to be in the hospital for the whole delivery and not just come in and "catch" the baby at the end. I felt it was all about malpractice, not the individual. Happy to say that I delivered a healthy 8 and half lb baby on 9/20/06 and she was just perfect!! Thank you to that wonderful dr who gave me the chance to deliver the way I wanted to! I absolutley belive a woman should be able to choose how and where she wants to deliver (hospital, home, midwife, or MD) as long as mother and baby are healthy and happy!!!

  • Posted By: VA reader @ 01/29/2008 2:41:58 PM

    Comment: One thing the article doesn't note is that far many more "older" (late 30s and even 40s) women these days are having babies. These women are considered (as I was) "high-risk pregnancies" and high-risk pregnancies naturally carry a greater chance of needing a C-section.

    PS -- to the poster below: so God doesn't support kids born via C-section? Hmmm.. somehow my priest missed that and here he is, helping us plan my baby's baptism! Sheesh....

    • Posted By: claireoconnell @ 01/29/2008 14:50:29

      Comment: I did not say he doesn't support c-sections. I said he designed us to give birth vaginally, so he supports vaginal birth.

      • Posted By: jwshowpigs @ 01/29/2008 15:02:45

        Comment: God gave us feet too, but are we not supposed to use cars?

        • Posted By: tehanismom @ 01/29/2008 15:59:56

          Comment: when you find out the answer to that ridiculous question, do let us know.

    • Posted By: jwshowpigs @ 01/29/2008 14:44:05

      Comment: True plus there are many women who are having babies now that childbirth not to long ago would have been a death sentence...many women with lots of physical problems.

  • Posted By: claireoconnell @ 01/29/2008 2:34:16 PM

    Comment: God supports vaginal birth, he designed us to give birth vaginally.

    • Posted By: facmom @ 01/29/2008 15:15:09

      Comment: Tell that to my children who were both delivered (healthy) by c-section. I hope you don't mean they should not have been born?

    • Posted By: jwshowpigs @ 01/29/2008 14:37:05

      Comment: Apparently he supports csec births too...otherwise he wouldn't let the mother and child survive.

  • Posted By: buttercupbaby @ 01/29/2008 2:16:24 PM

    Comment: THANK YOU! I completely agree. My 1st baby was a preterm vaginal delivery (still born due to extreme prematurity), my second baby was a fully natural full term delivery, my third baby was an extremely premature birth via C-section that was completely necessary. After having both low risk and high risk vaginal and c-section deliveries I see the need for both, but much prefer the vaginal delivery. I am wanting to conceive again but no one will let me deliver vaginally even though VBAC's are more successful when you've had a previous successful vaginal delivery. Some women have c-sections without complication, for me, however, the c-section took me 8 mo to recover from due to recurrent infections and other complications. For the vaginal deliveries I did need a few stitches but my recovery time was so much less. I keep praying that I will find a Dr. who will give me the choice to attempt a VBAC. Why should a DR tell me what I can and can't do with my own body. I do not advocate doing things that are not safe, but research has shown that as long as it is a normal low risk birth that attempting a vbac is safe. It saddens me that I won't be given the opportunity to have a vaginal delivery when I know how much I enjoyed my previous full term vaginal delivery. If I were given the opportunity and something went wrong then I would have no problem with the Dr. doing a c-section, the problem is not being given the option when all indications would show that for me a vbac would pose lower risks than a repeat s-section. Medical care needs to be catered to each individiual situation, but unfortunately many Dr.'s are not making the care as individually based as it should be. Every woman and every baby is different and they each need different care that suites their individual situation best. I think many mothers end up feeling guilty when their birth does not go how they want it to. Overcoming the sense of loss for a birth th