Choosing a Cesarean is Perfectly Reasonable for Informed Women

[cesareans]

glassgirl41 (re: your comment on the 3-fold risk of neonatal death).

May I ask that when you cite references and studies, you first consider whether the conclusion in the abstract is relevant to a planned cesarean at 39+ gestational weeks? And that it does not compare vaginal birth outcomes alone? What's relevant is the health outcomes of different birth PLANS, and ALL their outcomes, and on this, more accurate comparison, babies have very, very good outcomes with a planned cesarean.

[glassgirl41]

You may be the "lucky" 1 in 7 whose saved from POP. Of course you may be one of the unlucky 1 in 25 who needs a blood transfusion or 1 in 154 who ends up with a hysterectomy. If you choose to have another child by cesarean you can consider the 1 in 5 risk of dense adhesions which may attach the uterus to other internal organs, causing pain or damage. These and other risk factors go up with each cesarean.

Obstetrics & Gynocology. 2006; 107: 1226-1232

Obstetrcis & Gynocology. 2006; 108: 21-6

[cesareans]

@glassgirl41 Thank you for commenting here. You are entirely correct that there are risks associated with cesarean birth too. My point is that women are often very well informed of the risks of a cesarean, while the risks of a planned vaginal delivery are often underestimated or completely ignored. A woman should be advised of both sets of risks and benefits, and then she can decide (if she wants to) which risks she can best tolerate, and which benefits she values most.

[glassgirl41]

RESULTS: A total of 195 mothers at repeat cesarean delivery were compared with 1486 mothers at repeat vaginal delivery. Mothers with previous cesarean birth were at high risk of peripartum hysterectomy and placenta accrete followed by placenta praevia [OR 7.6 (95% CI=0.48-122.8), 7.6 (0.48-122.8) and 2.5 (0.68-9.6) respectively]. Very preterm birth [OR=3.86, 95% CI 1.15-12.97)] was the most significant neonatal adverse outcome.

J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2011 Feb;21(2):84-7.

[glassgirl41]

"Although the absolute difference is small, the risks of severe maternal morbidity associated with planned cesarean delivery are higher than those associated with planned vaginal delivery. These risks should be considered by women contemplating an elective cesarean delivery and by their physicians."

CMAJ. 2007 Feb 13;176(4):455-60.

Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term.

[glassgirl41]

You're right, women should be able to look at all the facts about cesarean and vaginal birth before choosing.

"(C)esarean independently raises the risk of neonatal death by almost three-fold - .62 per 1000 deaths among vaginal births versus 1.77 per 1000 infant deaths among cesarean"

I would love to link a reference but youtube won't allow a url to be placed.

[cesareans]

I have written to 82LisaMaree to request that she provides a reference/ study citation for her comment.

[82LisaMaree]

CONCLUSIONS:

The finding that cesarean deliveries with no labor complications or procedures remained at a 69 percent higher risk of neonatal mortality than planned vaginal deliveries is important, given the rapid increase in the number of primary cesarean deliveries without a reported medical indication.

[82LisaMaree]

The unadjusted neonatal mortality rate for cesarean deliveries with no labor complications or procedures was 2.4 times that for planned vaginal deliveries. In the most conservative model, the adjusted odds ratio for neonatal mortality was 1.69 (95% CI 1.35-2.11) for cesareans with no labor complications or procedures, compared with planned vaginal deliveries.

[TheDoulajill]

if women were supposted to give birth by c/s, they would be born with a zipper in their bellies

[TomJonesJr1]

Sounds like a good way to increase hospital profits..... fuck this bull