(Closed) Interesting article and c-sections

posted 7 years ago in Babies
Post # 3
858 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: June 2010

It is scary, but it sounds like a lot of women just want the C-Section because it is “easier” and sometimes choose to ignore the doctor’s advice. Also, I agree that they should be warning women about these risks. I had never heard of it before.

Post # 4
13096 posts
Honey Beekeeper
  • Wedding: July 2010

I believe most doctors already recommend that a woman not have more than 3 C-sections (although obviously they can’t force you to not get pregnant even though they’ve told you it will likely have ill effects on your health and the health of the baby).

Post # 5
245 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: March 2012

I am a medical student and recently spent 8 weeks delivering babies vaginally and assisting in c-sections.  I can tell you that most physicians would agree that cesarians should only be if necessary.  A surgery is ALWAYS a big deal and no one should take it lightly. Unfortunately there is a “trend” now of women wanting to get c-sections on their own time etc. 

Post # 7
9029 posts
Buzzing Beekeeper
  • Wedding: June 2011

Alot of women that I know in america have the problem of their doctors suggesting and almost forcing the idea o the c-section on them. Its quite sad actually, its become the norm to just opt for c-section with no actual medical need for it

Post # 9
3000 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: July 2012

In college, I wrote a paper for my Women’s Health class about the rising trend in unnecessary c-sections in the US. It’s staggering how many women get them in the US compared to other countries (percentage-wise). A lot of women don’t understand that it is still a risky surgery, as opposed to the “natural” way of birthing by pushing. Also, many women are simply just afraid to push the baby out for fear of the effects on their “woman parts”. There’s definitely a lot of miscommunication in the US regarding this.

Post # 12
2207 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: September 2009

I am having a c-section (it was by my own choice initially.  I was one of those who chose elective c-sec, but now she is transverse so its medically necessary) and my doctor DID warn me about this.  The percentages in this article sound grossly overexaggerated based on the medical literature he gave me (25% chance of developing placenta accreta if the placenta forms in the same spot sounds huge, otherwise we’d hear about this a LOT more) so unless you are reading medical publications, Id be weary of numbers you are hearing.  Do I think its concerning? Absolutely.  But so are a lot of conditions.

Post # 13
13096 posts
Honey Beekeeper
  • Wedding: July 2010

@runsyellowlites: There are also increased risks that come along with VBACs.  I’m not saying that I necessarily agree with the fact that many doctors/hospitals won’t do them but there is a liability that they are worried about.

Post # 15
1177 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: September 2013

This is fascinating! I’m taking a developmental psychology class, and we learn about a lot of this stuff… thank you for posting this!


From everything I’ve learned, I would love to have a home birth.

Post # 16
1940 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: July 2010

Medical decisions are made based on risks and benefits.  These decisions are rarely black and white, and there are many factors to take into consideration.  A drug/procedure may be inappropriate for one patient but the best option for another patient.  Without reading the primary literature and having a background in statistical methods, it can be difficult to evaluate the true risk, as media tends to distort the informatiomn.

As a hypothetical example:

Suppose there is a 1% chance of a disease occuring in a population.  By giving a new drug, that chance is lowered by 0.5%.  So… one way to put that is that the absolute risk reduction is 0.5% (1% – 0.5% = 0.5%).  Or, it could be reported as as a relative risk reduction 50% – because 50% less patients developed the disease.  My point… the media will pick up on the “50% decreased change of developing the disease” and completely bypass the fact that only 1% of the population would have likely developed the disease to begin with.  What makes better headlines “New Drug Reduces Risk of AIDS by 50%” or “New Drug Reduces Risk From 1% to 0.5%?”  Technically they both are right…

What I am trying to get at is that all the medical professionals that I have ever worked with are trying to do the best for their patients.  If you have questions/ concerns, they should be brought up to your healthcare professional.  Please understand that there are a lot more things to consider than just what the media talks about though.

Edt: I want to reiterate that I’m not minimizing the seriousness of either the condition Placenta Accreta or the increasing worldwide incidence.  I just wanted to point out that there are a multitude of considerations that must be made when evaluating the information that is being presented.

The topic ‘Interesting article and c-sections’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors