|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:50 pm
Quote: Date: Sept. 15th in a local paper. Article by New York Reuters Health. Title: "Elective C-sections Increase Risk of Infant Death". A new study has found a higher risk of infant deaths among infants born by caesarean section to mothers who have no medical need for the procedure. While c-sections have saved the lives of "countless" women and babies, and the risk of infant death is still very low, it is crucial to determine the reasons for the higher infant mortality seen with c-section, because the rates of this surgery are becoming increasingly common, [says] Dr. Marian F. MacDorman of the National Center for Health Statistics. Discussion: Should C-sections be elective? Why/why not?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 4:36 pm
I think that they should be an option in case they are needed. The only reason I'm alive, is because of an emergancy c-sect that allowed the doctors to get me medical treatment that I needed. But I don't understand why they are somthing a person would want to go through if it isn't needed.
Surgury, while avoiding the pain of labour, still is painful itself, and runs the risks of infection and slow healing.
I guess, I don't really understand why or think that a woman should under go surgury for something that is otherwise, usually, a natural process.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 11:14 am
I think that alot of the reasons are selfish that women get c sections instead of pushing like they should. I definatly understand emergency c sections and even medically suggested ones but otherwise I think its not right. Most women who get one have to continue to get them so I dont think its right to elect to bring a baby into the world in a non natural fashion. I have read about a lot of celebrities that opted for c section because when you go into transition labor the pelvic area really spreads (thats when women really gain there hips). I also know that some women dont go through natural because of the pain, I think that going through that intense experience made me appreciate my husband and son more. My husband proved how much I meant to him, he never left my side when I gave birth. My son experienced everything I experienced, I think ultimately it makes the bond stronger. Anyways I am sick so i doubt this was coherant so Nikolita edit to your hearts content if you think it needs it. Wotfan
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:19 am
I think they should be elective. Totally utterly and completley.
I intend to have one when I have children as I prefer the idea. It has occured to me that this is likley to be for selfish reasons in that I find the idea of natural childbirth unnerving and it's not somthing I want to do , although I still want to have children. Considering there are risks to both the mother and the infant no matter which method you choose It's not somthing that would concern me and I don't see why women should be forced or legally obligated to go through what could be for them a horrific experience to have a child when there are other options available.
Furthermore I don't believe that there is as much of a "mother child bond" as people make out. I don't like how society expects new mothers to "just know" how to look after an infant and lets fathers get away without this inherent responsibility when males in the animal kingdom quite often have lots of interaction with new young. Considering how many women have postnatal depression and are too afraid to mention it because they think it makes them a bad person I doubt this bond, if it can exist before spending time with the child is as strong as the media would have us believe.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:03 pm
C-Sections are on the rise - among perfectly healthy young women.
There are several reasons for this. One is that it is considered more "medical" (rather than the "archaic" vaginal birth) and medical is considered the way of the future and good.
Another reason is women are misinformed - believing that, because it is more "medical," that it is safer.
A final reason I can think of is that a lot of women are worried about stretching to the v****a - worried that it will make them less appealing to men.
There was been a significant push lately (no pun intended) in Canada to promote normal vaginal birth when there are no medical reasons to do otherwise because of how dangerous C-Sections can be and how much longer the recovery periods are.
But still, there is a lot of misinformation.
Now, I'm all for choice. I don't like the idea of doctors telling me what to do. It's MY body. If I want proceedure X instead of proceedure Y, that's MY choice to make. Yes, it may be more dangerous and all that, but it's MY body and MY choice. I don't think that medical decisions should ever be FORCED onto anyone.
That being said, however, I do believe that a lot of women are choosing to get C-Sections based on misinformation. I do believe that they should be forced to make an INFORMED decision. This would mean that any healthy woman asking for a C-Section should be forced to attend a seminar (just a few hours - maybe as part as Lamaz classes or something) where she will be told all about the differences between C-Sections and vaginal birth. That way, when she does make her decision, it is less likely to be made based on misinformation, prejudice, or ignorance.
As far as infant mortality is concerned, I'm sorry but I don't find that to be an issue. When we come down to it, it's a woman's choice about her body. I don't think that medical proceedures should be forced on people even when it's for their own good, let alone if it's for the good of some third party.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 11:43 am
See this is a subject that in my oppinon is kinda up in the air. I have a friend that dosent have children yet but every woman in her family that she knows of (i.e. her grandmal,aunt, own mother) all had to have c-sections to deliver their babies so she is debating trying to have a vaginal birth when she dose finally have a child. So I think that with this one c-sections should be optional considering things such as family history and also weither or not the mother's body can take this stress of labor.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 11:49 am
I think c-Sections should only be done when needed but I think women should have the option. They should at least be more informed though.
As a side note, I think more women now are just lazy because my grandma had 7 kids and didn't have a C-section for any of them. My Mom told me that lobor isn't as bad as people make it. She didn't have any trouble giving birth to me and my twin, and I was breeched.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 6:20 pm
Kukushka That being said, however, I do believe that a lot of women are choosing to get C-Sections based on misinformation. I do believe that they should be forced to make an INFORMED decision. This would mean that any healthy woman asking for a C-Section should be forced to attend a seminar (just a few hours - maybe as part as Lamaz classes or something) where she will be told all about the differences between C-Sections and vaginal birth. That way, when she does make her decision, it is less likely to be made based on misinformation, prejudice, or ignorance. This is what I think as well. Just because it's a quick surgery that doesn't involve pushing DOESN'T mean it's safer or healthier, which a lot of women seem to believe. What some women don't realize though is that c-sections aren't as fantastic as they believe. 1. Longer initial healing period. That means you need help with your newborn for a lot longer. 2. Can make breastfeeding more difficult due to the pain from the incision and placement of the infant. 3. Can have complications and result in infertility or difficulty with future pregnancies. 4. Women who have c-sections report scar pain and itching YEARS afterwards. 5. Being pushed through the vaginal canal is GOOD for the baby. It squeezes fluid out of the baby's lungs and body that otherwise has to be removed, and if done improperly after a c-section can create life-long problems. The squeeze also stimulates the baby's lungs so there's less effort after a vaginal delivery to coax the baby to breath. While know there's also down-sides to vaginal, I find that these are some really compelling reasons to NOT get a c-section unless you have to. Anyone can tell you that ANY surgery is a risky surgery. If you can avoid surgery, it's usually better. Plus, with all the medical tools now, not to mention drugs, vaginal childbirth isn't nearly as painful or risky as it used to be. I personally feel c-sections should only be performed with medical reasoning... but I'm also for free choice, so go figure. However, I don't like that optional c-section rates are rising like crazy. There's no need. Ignorance is bliss, or so they say. Educate woman, and it's a lot more likely they'll go the vaginal route.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:16 pm
Anardana I think they should be elective. Totally utterly and completley. I intend to have one when I have children as I prefer the idea. It has occured to me that this is likley to be for selfish reasons in that I find the idea of natural childbirth unnerving and it's not somthing I want to do , although I still want to have children. Considering there are risks to both the mother and the infant no matter which method you choose It's not somthing that would concern me and I don't see why women should be forced or legally obligated to go through what could be for them a horrific experience to have a child when there are other options available. Furthermore I don't believe that there is as much of a "mother child bond" as people make out. I don't like how society expects new mothers to "just know" how to look after an infant and lets fathers get away without this inherent responsibility when males in the animal kingdom quite often have lots of interaction with new young. Considering how many women have postnatal depression and are too afraid to mention it because they think it makes them a bad person I doubt this bond, if it can exist before spending time with the child is as strong as the media would have us believe. I dont think you should make assumptions about whether or not the bond mothers feel with there children really exsists, until you have children of your own. I do understand that not everyone gets that seriously strong bond with there child right away but 2/3 of women do. For me I was bonding with my son while he was in eutero, I read to him and sang to him and even had one sided conversations with him. My husband also participated in the activities, we even got a heart moniter that you can use to hear your babies heart beat...except we used it to listen to my husbands and put the headphones on my tummy so he could hear all of our heartbeats together. My son had a birth defect and so after I held hiom for 15 seconds they whisked him away for surgery. My bond was strong enough that I got cleaned up and went to see him 10 minutes after I had pushed him out so I could see him before surgery and give him a kiss. I almost fainted on the way up to him so they got me a wheelchair and tried to take me back to my room but I said no way. you said that that is just somthing used so men dont have to step up to the plate, when you have kids if your husband doesnt step up drop him. That isnt how the world works anymore, my husband works and I am a housewife so I do most of the careing for our son during the day........at night when my husband is home we do everything together for him...bathtime, reading time, dinnertime, playtime. Our kitchen is small so usually I will cook or he will cook and the other will play with our son. Try not to be so skeptical about the bonds parents feel for there children, I hope one day you feel it for yourself http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maternal_bondhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternal_bond
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:46 pm
Anardana Furthermore I don't believe that there is as much of a "mother child bond" as people make out. I have to comment on this as well. I was so totally in love with my son before he was even born. Every kick (even the ones that hurt) was so awesome, and I kept my hand on my stomach practically all the time, like I could hold him that way, even if there was skin and guts between us. When he was born, my feelings for him were so strong that I even lost all self-consiousness for awhile, because I was convinced that if my body could make something as perfect as my son, my body was perfect too. (Too bad that feeling didn't last!) When he was 2 days old and we had to rush him to the emergency room, I cried until I was medically dehyrated and the skin under my eyes was red and raw from wiping the tears. I was scared he was going to die and I felt like I would die too if he did... and he was 2 days old - we'd had him out of the hospital for 10 hours before we took him back for a week. If you don't think that's a bond, then... well, I won't say what I was going to. Society DOESN'T just expect a mom to know how to take care of a newborn. That's why there's 50 million books on infant care, classes up the wazoo, and friends and neighbors saying, "What do you need? Do you need help?" and strangers telling you what to do around every turn. More so, people assume if you're a first time mom that you have NO CLUE what to do. Depression has nothing to do with a lack of bond with your child. It's more to do with sudden INSANE lack of sleep, combine with new confusing responsibilities, a huge tremor in your relationship with your spouse, and the sudden feeling like you never have a second to yourself and having the feeling like everyone is suddenly judging every tiny little thing you do, from the way you pick up your child to the direction you sneeze. Try having your life suddenly completely and utterly changed in a matter of hours and not feeling overwhelmed. A lot of women also feel depressed because pregnant women get TONS of attention, especially when their tummies are HUGE. Then suddenly this baby pops out, and most people ooh and ah over the baby and don't look twice at the mother other than to give her (un)wanted advice or tell her she looks great... for just having had a baby. Also, PPD is a hormonal imbalance that has nothing to do with the lack of a bond. And um, since when do fathers get away without responsibility? I seem to remember throwing a dirty diaper at my husband because he wouldn't change it when I asked him to. I don't know any woman with a child now who's husband's not involved. You must still live in the 50's and haven't ever been pregnant.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 7:31 am
I think they should. When I had my daughter, I had preeclampsia, which is high blood pressure, headaches, and other complications caused by pregnancy. The only way to get cure is is to have the baby. I went into the hospital on a thursday night and they started an IV of Magnesium which kinda dopes you up... they also put me on Pitocin which starts contractions. The problem was the 2 medicines were counteracting eachother so I was bedridden for 2 days in active labor. Late Friday/early Saturday my contractions got worse and had to start pushing. I didn't have my baby until 6:30 a.m on Saturday. During that time, whenever I had a contraction, the nurse had to tell me because I was so doped up I couldn't feel them. After each push, I would fall asleep snoring then wake up again moments later. I begged and begged for them to give me a c-section but they laughed at me. I pushed for 2 hours until I had my daughter then slept until Sunday afternoon......
... I think that was very uncalled for.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|