I ended up with an emergent C section after 36 hours of labor. 12 of which were in the hospital and on pitocin. They had to do an emergent because all day long my little guys heart rate kept dropping. It would come back up so they just continued to let me labor. Well, my LO HR dropped to 60 again and this time it wouldn't come back up... so they knocked me out and did the c section. I missed my sons entire birth! I missed his first bath and I was so drugged I don't even remember much of his first days. When they did the c section i was only dialated to 4cm (after 36 hours). I went for my 6 week check and the dr told me a was a candidate for VBAC with my next. I personally will NOT be attempting a VBAC. For several reasons.... I was in labor 36 hours ON PITOCIN and only dialated to 4cm! (I was 40 wks and had gone into labor on my own but wasn't progressing at all) With a VBAC they cannot give you pitocin and my whole family has a history of extremely long and horrible births. The possibilty of ending up with another emergent c section has made up my mind that i will just do a scheduled C next time around. I would HATE to miss my second childs birth....I already missed out on so much the first time around.
i put this poll up because i was curious to see what women on here thought about this. i myself have had one vaginal birth. of course it hurt. its suppose to. i dont think its right to send out the message that you can have a baby but not have to deal with the final part of pregnancy which hurts and is uncomfterable and can last for days. i had my son in germany 10 years ago and it was one of the most fullfilling experiences ive had to date. the doctors and nurses were all about me and what i wanted. they left me alone unless i asked for them and then until they needed to be there. it was fantastic. however, i was with a girlfriend of mine when she gave birth a few months ago in medicine hat canada and i was very unhappy watching her have to go through it. it seemed like the doctor had somewhere more important to be and was rushing her through the whole thing. shes a strong cookie and did fantastic regardless. plus i think society today treats pregnancy as a medical condition. were not dying were just pregnant. the human race has survived just fine without drs interference. i understand in some cases it is needed but for the rest of us who have uncomplicated pregnancies they should just leave well enough alone.
I put yes and thats cus I have heard things about this being true and cus my SIL is one of the ones who selectively chose C-section! They told her the risks of VBAC and she was done didnt even bother just set up her 2nd C-section I would have at least attempted the birth if i could have! I know VBAC can be hard but its worth a shot right?
Just to add on, I hope none of you think of my vote any differently than if I'd have had a vaginal birth. From day one of my positive I wanted nothing more than to have a water birth, with as little medical intervention as possible, including NO pain relief. I had my perfect birth planned, but I chose not to try to flip him because of all the risks involved and my cousin had her baby flipped and went into labor right after...I had been having contractions since 23 weeks, and with all the risks involved, i.e. the placenta breaking away, going into early labor (I was 33 weeks when they wanted to do it)...I wanted DS to be healthy, and I had him at 39 weeks exactly. I must admit I was happy about my decision, DH was also able to come home for the birth because it was scheduled (he was in S Korea), but honestly I would have rather DH miss the birth and DS come out vaginally when he was ready than to go through the c-section. But like I said the risks out weighed my perfect birth when it came to DH's health. He was in the nursery the first 24 hours and I couldn't hold him until 15 hours later because he had fluid in his lungs from not being squished out. But to me 24 hours in the nursery was much better than weeks if he had been born earlier. I'm definitely opposed to elective c-sections for "just because" reasons, and I still to this day wonder if I made the right decision instead of trying to turn DS, but from now on any pregnancy...VAGINAL birth for me, unless of course something serious happens and baby's or my life is at risk
It isn't right for doctors to give women unnecessary c-sections because THEY fear a malpractice suit. And with any procedure in a hospital you are supposed to give your consent. You don't consent to a c-section and tell your doctor NO (in a non-emergent situation, of course) then you have that right. They make women feel powerless and vulnerable and even desperate by telling them they HAVE to have a c-section, when most of the time a woman doesn't need one.
I said yes. At 38 weeks I was induced and my water was broke. I was put on pitocin. After hours....no progressing..they hiked my pitocin up further. After 12 hours of not passing 4cm they said I HAD to have a c-section. Didnt really go over anything else with me or if I could try to labor longer.....
I think if they had let me labor longer.....I could have possibly had a regular delivery.
I had a c section 11 days ago, i needed one because baby was laying across and not head down so there was no way he would have came out. I cant understand why women would want a c section if really not needed, it has got to be one of the worst things ive been through, if i didnt get a beautiful baby boy out of it i would never got over it. Im fine and more or less back to normal now but OMG it was hard for the first week. I feel like ive missed out on the birth of my son. Kelly
I voted yes. I have to agree with Joy. Also...I gave birth at birthing center and my son was coming down very crooked and I was stuck at 8-9cm for 5-6 hours...that wouldn't fly in a hospital and had I gone (almost had to) they would have given me a c-section no questions asked, I am almost certain. I stuck it out and was able to deliver my son, it just took a little bit longer than normal and his heart rate was always fine, so he wasn't in distress. They are performed way too much. Unless it's absolutely necessary, there is no reason docs should be performing them as much as they do. A woman should be given the chance to deliver vaginally and I know most are robbed of this or would just rather have a c-sec planned ahead when it wasn't necessary.
I would have to agree with the other ladies that say there is far too many elective c-sections out there. I have known women who had scheduled theirs so that wouldn't fall too close to another birthday, wanted the baby born before the end of the year so they could claim them on taxes, and so on. I find it ridiculous and unethical, especially for the doctors that agree to it. A baby is supposed to be born a certain way, and UNLESS it is medically necessary, I don't think a c-section should be performed. There are far to many women and doctors who do it 'just because'.
I didnt vote one way or the other because I see both sides. Doctors HAVE to be concerned with malpractice suits because of the overly litigious society we all reside in today. There is vaildity there b/c Doctors need to protect themselves as well. With that said, I DO feel that many women elect for a c-section when it isn't medically necessary and I do NOT agree that this is acceptable. Unfortunately, Dr.'s all operate under different personal terms and it is ultimately a decision made between Dr. and patient. Dr.'s would not agree to these terms unless there were enough patients pushing for them.. (women wanting voluntary c-sections) Supply and demand so to speak. It IS the world we live in..
Yes. Doctors now give csections just because your labor is not going fast enough. When my mother had me, she was in labor for two days (which was considered normal at the time). That's unheard of now. The doctor wants you in... and out. If that means doing a surgical procedure that you don't need, so be it.
Well said Joy, well said!!!! Frankly I think it's selfish on a womans part to ELECT a c-section for no medical reason simply becuase they want the timing to be perfect or they don't want to experience labor. I also think doctors are far more concerned with their malpractice insurance and their own agendas than they are with the womans and baby's health. Doctors get paid a lot more to perform c-sections than they do vaginal births...hmmmm...something to think about.
I for one am not about to have major surgery simply to pad my doctors wallet.
****Let me add that, if it IS NECESSARY (i.e. life threatening for mother/baby) than I'm ok with it, and would have voted no.
I voted yes, and I had a c-section. I did elect for it because DS was breech, and I weighed the pros and cons for trying to turn him, and discussed it with my doctor. I decided that for me personally if DH didn't flip on his own it was God's way of saying "you need a c-section". BUT I do agree with the other "yes" voters...too many women seem to be having them electively just so "I don't have to go through labor"...
And I don't agree for a minute that we have more babies in distress (unless doctors deliberately Pit them to distress, by having nurses crank up Pitocin) or that there are more risks and problems in womens' pregnancies whatsoever. There are women out there having c-sections that don't need them. Go read their testimonials, how violated and powerless they felt and how they found out later they could've had their baby vaginally.
And remember... a doctor estimating a "large baby" (9.5 lbs or bigger) via sonogram or externally feeling baby is NOT a valid reason, according to ACOG, for a c-section or induction!!!
I voted YES! All *elective* c-sections aside... (which don't account for that many of c-sections anyway).
Most c-sections are done unnecessarily or are pushed on women long before they even need to be thinking of a c-section (failure to descent, for one... seriously?!). The ACOG website gives a list of what are approved reasons for a c-section and there are MANY reasons not on there that doctors use to perform them anyway.
When the US has 1 in 3 women having c-sections there is something WRONG. I have many great resources that give accurate statistics and are purposefully trying to cut down the c-section rates to PROTECT women and their babies.
Not all doctors are like this, but many of them are aggressive and do have agendas. Women are having MAJOR abdominal surgery performed on them every single day and we've become so desensitized because it's so common. There are many repercussions and risks associated with cesareans, longer recovery time and is not beneficial to baby unless in an emergent situation.
Research the facts! All I have to say.
I voted yes. Too many doctors are pushing for c-sections when they aren't absolutely necessary becuase they can control the risks more. Therefore they are less likely to have any malpractice suits. Docs are pushing for c-sections more, women are opting for c-sections when they aren't necessary simply becuase they can fit "delivery" in their schedule when it's more convenient.
I have had a c-section and in my case it WAS necessary...my daughter was 2 weeks overdue, she had intrauterine growth retardation, my fluid has completely vanished and her hb was dropping. I have since had 4 VBACS althought I was given the option for repeate c-sections. I even had one doctor assume I was going to have a repeat c-0section and i told him in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS i most certainly would NOT unless it became absolutely necessary.
i voted no because there are more and more women out there having difficult pregnancies, babies in distress in the womb etc that if we didn't have as many c sections i feel there would be a lot of women and babies at risk of disability, or death