If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   Executive Director of maternity care non-profit: "Women don't have full, accurate and unbiased information about the benefits and harms of having an elective C-section." Hospitals:"$hut up"   (io9.com) divider line 22
    More: Obvious, United States, executive directors, Canadian Medical Association Journal, risk profiles, gut bacteria, infant mortality, intensive care, nonprofits  
•       •       •

2804 clicks; posted to Geek » on 02 Mar 2013 at 5:35 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-03-02 05:44:39 PM
4 votes:
I mostly get angry when people say its 'just' a csection. No, its a major surgery. Just because its done all the time doesnt mean it shouldnt be taken very seriously.
2013-03-03 01:03:47 AM
3 votes:
Why is it that apparently the only time we trust women to make an informed, rational decision about their own reproductive health it's when they are deciding to have an abortion?  Get the fark out of the way between women and their doctors making medical decisions about their own health.
2013-03-04 12:05:55 PM
2 votes:

Fukuzawa: Harbinger of the Doomed Rat: The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men:

In my wife's case they gave her the pitocin after 2 days or not giving her enough water, food, or sleep. After that, things you wouldn't normally have agreed to before sound like much better options.

/Never went back to that OB again, but the damage was done.
//At least he didn't have to work late on New Years.


Ok, then when she does have the emergency c-section after not being able to have it vaginally for too long, you'll be ok with the fact that they fed her and she died of aspiration when the food/drinks came up and went straight down into her lungs and drowned her on the operating table...  but for God's sake, feed the girl!
2013-03-03 08:12:24 PM
2 votes:
I'm actually going to have to make this decision within the year, and given that I was a C-section myself, knowing what the side effects were like for many friends and aunties who've done it the natural way, the surgical way and even the adoptive way...I have to say, who knows what they're doing better, a surgeon who yanks out more sprogs than I've had hot dinners, or some Farkette whose idea of physical exertion involves the Kinect?

I don't need this woo-woo 'natural' stuff or any of the doulas' waxing eloquent about a 'positive birth experience.' I'm in this to get a small, crying, puking, crapping and eventually talking critter I can eventually teach to read, take to Pixar movies and send fishing with her father, among other challenging and rewarding activities. I do not need a 'positive birth experience' to get that anymore than I need a 'positive experience' with pools of warm water and deep breathing and aromatherapy and bullshiat to renew my driver's license, close on a house or accept a promotion.

It's a life change, not a freakin' Sweet Sixteen, and these whack-a-doodle ladies who go on and on about how they want their birth experience to be perfect are insane. The kid is never going to remember it, the father probably just wants to see as little placenta as possible and provided I don't have to give birth in a cardboard box in the linen closet like Mittens, I'll be quite happy. If, in 2013, I have medical science as an option over backrubs and soft music, I am going with medical science. Medical science knows what it's doing 95% of the time and if it farks up, it can be sued. Let the wibbledy earth-mother hippies make a living decorating babies' rooms and writing really PC bedtime stories. If I find myself great with n00b, I want a pro to get it out of there.

We only want one kid, so the subsequent risk of uterine rupture without a C-section is not an issue, whereas the episiotomy and pelvic-floor risks are far less negotiable. If the doctor says C-section, I'll say "okay, what does other doctor say?" and if they both agree, then C-section it is. I'd rather take risks with my own healing-up than with the kid's health, and if I don't recover right away, well, that's what dads and overly-interested grandparents are for. If two different doctors say natural, then that's fine, too, and in the event of a disagreement, I'll either call up a third doctor or go with the one whose known me the longest, since 'Downton Abbey' made a good point on that. Consulting at least two experts is never a bad idea.

Listening to mindless and or derpy fear-mongering, however...let's just say that I don't think any good can come out of making already hormone-crazed ladies panic. It's like they want a bunch of gravid vigilantes to enforce a bloody cull of what used to be the Third Estate out of sheer pique.
2013-03-03 11:29:44 AM
2 votes:

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: dave2198:

The doctor, who is his own boss and owns his own practice, is not a mouthpiece for the hospital administration.

I'll rephrase - a lot of OB practices increase the risk of emergency c-sections, which are the worst case delivery scenario for mother and baby. People should be very skeptical of the OB, and hospital's, motives when they say that their sole priority is delivering a healthy baby.



Citation please. Seriously. What on earth are OBs doing that you think increases the need for emergency c-sections? While c-sections decrease the risk of neonatal morality, they don't come without risk to the mother. The goal of the OB is to maximize the chance of a healthy baby with a healthy mother.

Every decision made about intervention during birth comes with a trade-off. If you decrease the number of c-sections, you will increase the neonatal mortality rate. Somebody has to have the one dead baby that could have been saved by a timely intervention that seeks to mitigate a small risk. Are you okay with it being your baby? How about mine? Because if you tell me that my baby has a 1% chance of death without a c-section and a 0.001% with a c-section, guess which one I'm going to choose?
2013-03-03 10:18:12 AM
2 votes:
dave2198:

The doctor, who is his own boss and owns his own practice, is not a mouthpiece for the hospital administration.

I'll rephrase - a lot of OB practices increase the risk of emergency c-sections, which are the worst case delivery scenario for mother and baby. People should be very skeptical of the OB, and hospital's, motives when they say that their sole priority is delivering a healthy baby.
2013-03-02 10:43:01 PM
2 votes:

veive: dave2198: My wife had 2 c-sections, the first came after about 12 hours of unproductive labor. The doctor said one thing that calmed my worries about c-sections:

The goal is to have a healthy baby.

That's it. Whatever gives the baby the highest chance of survival, a doctor will choose that option. If having a c-section means shaving a few percentage points off the risk of death in a particular scenario, then they should use it.

Purists need to EABOD & DIAF. Yeah, women didn't always have access to c-sections, and most of the deliveries turned out just fine.

Most. Many babies also died.

The goal is to have a healthy baby.

Exactly. The goal is to have a healthy baby and a healthy mother at the end.
The point of TFA is that when you have a c section that isn't needed that doesn't always happen, since y'know it's major abdominal surgery and there can be long term problems for both the mother and the child.

It's called 'too much of a good thing' for a reason.


Agreed, but it's a slippery slope when you start telling women what they should and shouldn't do in regards to giving birth and taking care of a baby.  There are many purists out there, who, if allowed to have their way, will do more harm than good. They would ban c-sections, ban formula, ban immunizations.

I would rather err on the side of vanity than needless death.
2013-03-02 09:08:09 PM
2 votes:
My wife had 2 c-sections, the first came after about 12 hours of unproductive labor. The doctor said one thing that calmed my worries about c-sections:

The goal is to have a healthy baby.

That's it. Whatever gives the baby the highest chance of survival, a doctor will choose that option. If having a c-section means shaving a few percentage points off the risk of death in a particular scenario, then they should use it.

Purists need to EABOD & DIAF. Yeah, women didn't always have access to c-sections, and most of the deliveries turned out just fine.

Most. Many babies also died.

The goal is to have a healthy baby.
2013-03-02 05:56:58 PM
2 votes:
American 'healthcare' problems. Meh.
2013-03-02 05:54:31 PM
2 votes:

Urthel: Jae0o0: I mostly get angry when people say its 'just' a csection. No, its a major surgery. Just because its done all the time doesnt mean it shouldnt be taken very seriously.

Agreed.  My wife had to have one due to medical issues.  It was crazy to walk into the OR and see the procedure.  She had a minor infection post surgery which thankfully healed.  She was not fully recovered for a long time.

On the bright side, with a c section you don't have to wait that long to resume intercourse (as compared to traditional delivery).  Of course, just having a baby, you have to wait forever anyway...


I had one kid vaginally and one kid via csection, I was told to wait 6 weeks to have sex after both.
2013-03-03 09:35:49 AM
1 votes:

dave2198: My wife had 2 c-sections, the first came after about 12 hours of unproductive labor. The doctor said one thing that calmed my worries about c-sections:

The goal is to have a healthy baby.

That's it. Whatever gives the baby the highest chance of survival, a doctor will choose that option.


If a hospital tells you their sole goal is to deliver a healthy baby then you might want to take that with a pinch of salt. They have business and liability concerns that they are also considering but may not share with you. The fact a lot of hospital practices increase the risk of emergency c-sections, which are a worst case for mother and baby, should make anyone skeptical of hospital motives.

/ glad your wife and child had a healthy outcome.
2013-03-03 09:22:53 AM
1 votes:

meanmutton: Why is it that apparently the only time we trust women to make an informed, rational decision about their own reproductive health it's when they are deciding to have an abortion?  Get the fark out of the way between women and their doctors making medical decisions about their own health.


In Texas, they don't. You have to go, see some 'we will scare you into having this baby' videos, talk to a Doctor, read some pamplets designed to show you how cute and amazing and cuddly the child is, then if you still haven't decided Abortion is a sin and a tool of Satan, you have a 24-48 hour cooling off period before you can have it done.

Meanwhile, you can buy a guy with cash in hand in under 5 minutes.

I love my state, but farking fark people, I hate religion most days. Especially the 'we're going to legislate your morals' bits.
2013-03-03 07:04:17 AM
1 votes:

dave2198: veive: dave2198: My wife had 2 c-sections, the first came after about 12 hours of unproductive labor. The doctor said one thing that calmed my worries about c-sections:

The goal is to have a healthy baby.

That's it. Whatever gives the baby the highest chance of survival, a doctor will choose that option. If having a c-section means shaving a few percentage points off the risk of death in a particular scenario, then they should use it.

Purists need to EABOD & DIAF. Yeah, women didn't always have access to c-sections, and most of the deliveries turned out just fine.

Most. Many babies also died.

The goal is to have a healthy baby.

Exactly. The goal is to have a healthy baby and a healthy mother at the end.
The point of TFA is that when you have a c section that isn't needed that doesn't always happen, since y'know it's major abdominal surgery and there can be long term problems for both the mother and the child.

It's called 'too much of a good thing' for a reason.

Agreed, but it's a slippery slope when you start telling women what they should and shouldn't do in regards to giving birth and taking care of a baby.  There are many purists out there, who, if allowed to have their way, will do more harm than good. They would ban c-sections, ban formula, ban immunizations.

I would rather err on the side of vanity than needless death.



I wouldn't refer to someone who wants to ban c-sections, formula, and immunizations a "purist" I'd call them a lunatic.  And while you may see it as a slippery slope, it's less like a slope and more like a vast gulf of difference between "new research shows it is likely healthier for both mother and child to deliver vaginally when a c-section is not medically necessary, so we would like doctors to stop recommending non-medically-necessary c-sections to women who woudn't have otherwise considered it" and "No c-sections ever for anyone for any reason!"

I'm not going to ask for a citation that there are in fact people who hold the position you oppose, because I know full well that that kind of whacknut has no difficulty finding a space on the internet from which to spout their rants, but conflating the objectives of lunatics with legitimate scientific research as you are doing is granting legitimacy to your opponents by stealing it from legitimate scientists.
2013-03-03 12:52:58 AM
1 votes:

Jim_Callahan: Jae0o0: I mostly get angry when people say its 'just' a csection. No, its a major surgery. Just because its done all the time doesnt mean it shouldnt be taken very seriously.

Well, should probably put some quotes around "major", there.  Simple abdominal incision avoiding areas with vital organs, to removes something that was coming out anyway, as surgery goes it's about as trivial/safe as you get.  Getting your wisdom teeth out at the dentist is, if I'm remembering my statistics right, somewhat more dangerous (to you, anyhow, as far as the baby is concerned being born is pretty dangerous regardless, which seems to be what TFA is talking about).

I mean, obviously surgery always comes with risks, but in all frankness so does pregnancy.  This is well within "consider risk versus reward and make a judgement call" territory, not the "do not do this unless all else fails" territory that a lot of people in the thread seems to be putting it in.  The fact that something comes with some elements of risk doesn't make it automatically last-resort material.

//People are notoriously bad at evaluating risks that don't involve being eaten by a now-extinct large predator.  Turns out two million years of middle-of-the-food-chain instincts don't really give you good "gut feeling" sense for top-of-the-food-chain problems.  This is why we have specialists who can help you with things like this when you're not, y'know, a doctor yourself.


I suggest you look up the definition of major surgery.
2013-03-02 10:38:10 PM
1 votes:

Whateva_I_DO_WHAT_I_WANT: dave2198: My wife had 2 c-sections, the first came after about 12 hours of unproductive labor. The doctor said one thing that calmed my worries about c-sections:

The goal is to have a healthy baby.

That's it. Whatever gives the baby the highest chance of survival, a doctor will choose that option. If having a c-section means shaving a few percentage points off the risk of death in a particular scenario, then they should use it.

Purists need to EABOD & DIAF. Yeah, women didn't always have access to c-sections, and most of the deliveries turned out just fine.

Most. Many babies also died.

The goal is to have a healthy baby.

Yes,however they are talking about elective c-sections. Scheduling a major surgery for the birth is what people are doing. That's not what's best for a healthy baby. Your wife on the other hand,had 2 probably life saving surgeries after trying vaginal. They are talking about something completely different


Yeah, the problem is that purists are trying to get a foot in the door. They will never stop with special cases like elective c-sections. I have spoken with many women who would like to see the entire practice done away with. 

When purists stick their foot in the door, it's best to grab an axe.
2013-03-02 10:03:15 PM
1 votes:

dave2198: My wife had 2 c-sections, the first came after about 12 hours of unproductive labor. The doctor said one thing that calmed my worries about c-sections:

The goal is to have a healthy baby.

That's it. Whatever gives the baby the highest chance of survival, a doctor will choose that option. If having a c-section means shaving a few percentage points off the risk of death in a particular scenario, then they should use it.

Purists need to EABOD & DIAF. Yeah, women didn't always have access to c-sections, and most of the deliveries turned out just fine.

Most. Many babies also died.

The goal is to have a healthy baby.


Exactly. The goal is to have a healthy baby and a healthy mother at the end.
The point of TFA is that when you have a c section that isn't needed that doesn't always happen, since y'know it's major abdominal surgery and there can be long term problems for both the mother and the child.

It's called 'too much of a good thing' for a reason.
2013-03-02 09:54:06 PM
1 votes:

dave2198: My wife had 2 c-sections, the first came after about 12 hours of unproductive labor. The doctor said one thing that calmed my worries about c-sections:

The goal is to have a healthy baby.

That's it. Whatever gives the baby the highest chance of survival, a doctor will choose that option. If having a c-section means shaving a few percentage points off the risk of death in a particular scenario, then they should use it.

Purists need to EABOD & DIAF. Yeah, women didn't always have access to c-sections, and most of the deliveries turned out just fine.

Most. Many babies also died.

The goal is to have a healthy baby.


Yes,however they are talking about elective c-sections. Scheduling a major surgery for the birth is what people are doing. That's not what's best for a healthy baby. Your wife on the other hand,had 2 probably life saving surgeries after trying vaginal. They are talking about something completely different
2013-03-02 08:55:10 PM
1 votes:

Teufelaffe: Some don't quite get how their vagina works and think they'll be "lose" forever after having a vaginal delivery.


Some women do, in fact, become "lose" forever after a vaginal delivery. The same issues also cause occasional postpartum (and continuing) incontinence after such deliveries. Natural birth sometimes causes quite a bit of pelvic floor damage. There's a lot of folks out there (midwives for example) who say NATURAL IS THE ONLY AND BEST WAY!!! when there's quite a few potential problems doing it the old-fashioned way.

Not that there aren't plenty of cautions to be had with C-sections too, the main one already having been mentioned - potential increased risks to future pregnancies/deliveries. Then there are times when it's not up for debate - like with me. I had the cord wrapped around my neck and wouldn't have survived a normal delivery.

/usually wish I hadn't
2013-03-02 07:52:07 PM
1 votes:

blue_2501: Who the frak has an "elective" C-section?  You only have a C-section if you can't give birth naturally (complications, premie, etc.).


Some women are afraid of tearing.  Some don't quite get how their vagina works and think they'll be "lose" forever after having a vaginal delivery.
2013-03-02 06:54:03 PM
1 votes:

Teufelaffe: Urthel: "Babies born via C-sections have an increased chance of having to be administered into the NICU [the neonatal intensive care unit] and suffer from breathing problems," she said.


Anyone think they factored out legitimate c sections birth in the "study" saying they are bad?  If you have a premie, they go to NICU.  How did that premie come into the world?  C section.

Using their logic, one could say that hospitals are bad, since pretty much everyone admitted to one subsequently requires medical care.


I know people who believe that.  You only find sick people in hospitals, ergo if I do not go I will not be sick.
2013-03-02 05:53:05 PM
1 votes:

Jae0o0: I mostly get angry when people say its 'just' a csection. No, its a major surgery. Just because its done all the time doesnt mean it shouldnt be taken very seriously.


Agreed.  My wife had to have one due to medical issues.  It was crazy to walk into the OR and see the procedure.  She had a minor infection post surgery which thankfully healed.  She was not fully recovered for a long time.

On the bright side, with a c section you don't have to wait that long to resume intercourse (as compared to traditional delivery).  Of course, just having a baby, you have to wait forever anyway...
2013-03-02 05:44:06 PM
1 votes:
"Babies born via C-sections have an increased chance of having to be administered into the NICU [the neonatal intensive care unit] and suffer from breathing problems," she said.


Anyone think they factored out legitimate c sections birth in the "study" saying they are bad?  If you have a premie, they go to NICU.  How did that premie come into the world?  C section.
 
Displayed 22 of 22 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report