A C-section carries alot more risks than people realize. My mom had one with my youngest sister. It was an emergency, the cord wrapped 2.5 times around Cassie's neck. They did not have her numb enough, she takes along time to get numb, but time was not a luxury so she felt every thing. Then they ended up leaving a portion of the placenta in her. 2 weeks later she had such an infection she could have died. It is not as easy to make sure the placenta is all out I guess.That said, my sister would not be here if she had not had the c-section.

I had all natural labors, my second should have been delivered by c-section but my doctor was a sadist, prick apparently. I was in labor for 74 hours. approx. 1/2 of which was active, hard labor. No drugs. Her head was just so big and she turned while working her way down the birth canal, her nose hit my pelvic bone and she literally sucked back in. I went from 10 cm to 8.5. It was hell. Beyond describable pain. Another 2 hours and she was finally born. He should have gone for the C-section as soon as they realized she was stuck. If I could've sued his sorry ass I would have. We thought her nose was broken but it was just bruised and very swollen. She got hung up on my pelvic bone when she turned.I just didn't have the strength to push effectively any longer.

The "too posh to push" thing really bugs me, but truth of the matter is alot of these very thin women are too small pelvic wise to deliver vaginally. A size 0 just doesn't have a very broad pelvis in most cases.

Sometimes a C-section is just medically necessary. All in all, its their right either way.

__________________
Since the government gets to use imaginary money to cover its ass, how come I can't use Monopoly money to pay my mortgage?

My sister had to have a c-section with my very last niece, and lucky
enough everything went great, but after closing her up, and a couple
days later, her insion ended up getting infected, and to this day (a year
later) she still has to have the fluid drained. Its just now finally starting
to heal properly.
I do believe that, if it is in the very best interest of the baby, and mother
then yes definitely have a c-section done, but if its just to take an easyer
way out, I am not sure that I'm really to fond of that idea.....there is alot
of risk while doing that kind of op.
But yes, it is in the right of the mother to choose.

__________________
Always Live Life To The Fullest,
And Never Take Anything For Granted!

Again, I ask and hopefully my post will be seen, since apparently censorship is what EvBoard is now about. What exactly is there to debate about this? Most of what I see comes from a moral stand point. There is no debate really about the health risks: C-Sections are offered in necessary and semi-necessary situations. I think many of you are mistaken as to what natural childbirth is; a doula, a home birth or natural birth in a home-setting at an alternative hospital is what a natural birth is. I'm sorry, that far outweighs the risk to other forms.

And medical help is not unnatural, it's evolution. We've come up with new ways of helping people and lessening the medical risks. Yeah, MRSA is probably more likely in a typical hospital birth, but infections in the mother and newborn are far more likely (see: sepsis, strep B sepsis)

Yes, C-Sections carry a great risk, but it's not the risk of the c-section itself, it's the risk of child birth. I'm clarifying because tehre were a few posts (that may have conveniently gotten deleted?) about natural being the way to go and figured that the boundaries needed to be clear.

Secondly, some of you seem to think you can choose to have a c-section. Most, not all hospitals, do not let you "choose" to have one for the sake of simplicity. There can be a planned c-section due to many complications, or an emergency c-section. I know of no doctors who ask "well do you want us to take the risk of cutting you open and pulling the little munchkin out or do you want to do it the most painful way possible (with an epidural?)."

__________________

COUNTRY FIRST

McCain/Palin 2008

No, I only "censor" posts that add absolutely nothing to the discussion. Thank you for coming back and adding substance.

Even though I don't see why this shouldn't this be a debate/discussion, when the past whole page is just that. There is more to it than whether or not doctors LET you choose to have one or not.

And having a C-section carries very different risks than natural childbirth.

By the way, I don't know what you're remembering, but no other posts have been deleted from this thread (unless you're counting one of my own).

__________________
could make me love you less...

I think cesareans should only be used when necessary, I mean why do we always have to change things that work perfectly on their own? [ again this is from a guys perspective, forgive me if I'm being callus ]

I think for the parents, at least it would be for me, that if the child is born naturally it's just something special, you know? Especially the first born.

But I also understand if a Cesarean is necessary, me and my sister needed a c- section since my mother was in an car accident and the bones were broken so that the baby couldn't come out naturally, I was 2 weeks late.

Now I would opt for natural but thats a preference, [ but really wouldn't you want a natural firstborn?] not a necessity, if it would but my wife [ not that I have one ] or the baby in danger I would go for c- section without a second thought. But I still think we shouldn't have to mess with natures plan unless necessary, like a danger to the mother or baby.

__________________

That leads perfectly into what I was going to post.

I have heard stories of women who were forced into having C-sections because their doctors were, after the woman being in labor for a long time - get this - TIRED. What excuse is that? Did these doctors forget that they took the Hypocratic Oath upon completion of med school? That's like telling someone who has absolutely nothing wrong with their heart that they should have heart surgery because (for some reason) it would be more convenient for the surgeon, although it would mean a completely unnecessarily long recovery time, and a lot of completely unnecessary risk. I mean, if it's not broken, don't fix it. But anyway....

There are many situations where C-section is the only choice. My mom had an emergency C-section with my older sister because she was having complications, and because of that, she really had no choice but to have C-sections with me and my younger sister. (I don't think VBACs were quite as common back then as they are now.)

If a woman wants to endure the long recovery of a C-section simply for one's own convenience, then that's fine. Personally I'd rather endure labor than have someone cut me open, unless cutting me open was absolutely necessary, but other women just might not feel that way about things.

__________________

I'd personally opt for a C Section if I was supposed to give birth, I am not going through labor and natural birth, seriously, do you know what kind of stuff oozes out of you while you are pushing? EWWWW I don't want that stuff coming out of me in front of 7 million doctors and my partner/wife. No thanks. C Section is for me, sorry to say that but it is.

~Monica

__________________

You obviously don't know the statistics concerning how many women actually shit themselves while giving birth. :P No one said it's pretty, haha.

What are the statistics? Do you know? And besides even if I know the statistics I still wouldn't do it. I'd much rather get a C Section and avoid all of that humiliation.

~Monica

__________________

I'm pretty sure it's something like 2 out of 3.

I think getting pregnant is lame anyway. Who'd ever want to have kids?! That's NUTS!