Because I am going to SCREAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This article and another one mentioned below came in my Google Alert today. I am not kidding when I say I want to slam myself on the floor and pound the earth and scream and cry until there are no more tears or voice left.
Some pertinent quotes (please read and respond to the articles and their writers):
From "Rate of C-section births at all-time high":
One thing on which people on all sides of the issue agree: The stated national goal of a 15 percent C-section rate will probably never happen.
Said Trofatter (the DIRECTOR of the hospital): “I really do envision a time when all patients deliver by C-section.”
NOT ME!!!!!!!! Everyone needs to scream NOT ME to him so he will hear us. Screaming yet?
Another OB says about women wanting a patient-choice cesarean:
They have a fear of going through labor, sometimes because prenatal tests indicate a big baby, he said. They especially dread enduring a long, arduous labor after which they might have to have a Caesarean, after all.
Ah, let's make labor sound so delicious to everyone, eh? Who wouldn't want a ROUTINE delivery instead of a... how did he say it? "long, arduous labor."
If you kept your prenatal tests out of the uteri, the crazy presumption of a big baby wouldn't be had! I wish I had a dollar for every woman who cried to me about her HUGE baby that ended up weighing under 9 pounds. Let's remind people that my over 11 pounder last year was an HBAC. WOMEN CAN BIRTH!!!
Oh my god, I think I am going to have an MI.
Let's move on, shall we?
Decades ago, Green might have faced hours of exhausting labor, painful efforts to turn the baby manually and possibly a difficult delivery with forceps. Now, it’s routine for breech babies to be born by Caesarean.
Doesn't that sound appealing? Who wouldn't choose ROUTINE instead of "exhausting," "painful efforts," "difficult," and "forceps?"
What happened to turning a baby through non-painful ways such as positioning? Chiropractic? Acupuncture? Versions?
What happened to describing the risks of a cesarean - even a scheduled one - in such graphic terms as "puncturing the bladder," (not to mention cutting the bladder off the uterus in the first place) "cutting a slice in the baby's face" or "permanent infertility because of adhesions that strangle the reproductive organs" and beyond.
As if the statement about all women having cesareans wasn't enough to make me vomit, here is another sentence to chill you to the bone (cited as a reason for the rise in cesareans):
Desire for a pain-free birth.
EXCUSE ME?!?!?!?!?! Who is allowing this LIE to be perpetuated?! Who actually THINKS a cesarean is pain-free?!?! Do they think because they threw that word "birth" in there it makes it alright? That women don't experience horrid paid DURING their surgeries even WITH anesthesia? And let's move to POSTPARTUM PAIN, shall we?!? The woman quoted in the article says she didn't need pain medications after a week on them. A WEEK!!!!!!!!!!!
A FUCKING WEEK OF PAIN compared to 24 hours (or so) of labor - that goes on and off every few minutes. A WEEK OF PAIN. Since when does a WEEK of pain meds constitute "pain-free?"
I am so angry I am shaking.
Another OB (of course):
“Honestly, the way many people look at it, most women who are young and healthy will recover quickly, anyway,” Risinger said. “They may say, ‘I had one C-section, and it wasn’t so bad.’”
This after describing that most of the women were having cesareans because they were FAT and unhealthy. That in Utah they have healthy women who eat right and don't drink or smoke, but that Americans are FAT and unhealthy. Could we contradict ourselves any more? And what about those women who are over 30 that they talked about... those that needed help with fertility meds and docs... do they account for the young and healthy, too? If we are so young and healthy, WHY AREN'T WE HAVING VAGINAL BIRTHS?!?!?!
Vaginal birth after Caesarean carries a small risk of serious complications. In the worst-case scenario, the scar from the mother’s previous C-section could rupture; the baby could be thrust into the abdominal cavity; bleeding could be catastrophic; the uterus could be lost; baby and mother could die.
No wonder women choose a "routine" cesarean with publicity like this!
Expectant mothers hear about the risks of Caesareans as well as risks of VBACs, Browning said. But he said they seem to react most strongly to possible hazards from going into labor and attempting a VBAC.
Really?!? Wonder why.
Tonya Jamois, president of ICAN, says:
I believe that it is a bit hypocritical to honor women’s choices in mode of delivery when it comes to a medically unnecessary primary Caesarean, but then enforce VBAC bans when her choice happens to be vaginal birth,” Jamois said.
You go girl!!
The article ends this way:
As obstetrician Hutchinson prepared to stitch up his patient while 7 pound, 14 ounce Manning was whisked away to the nursery (and that would be why?!?), he noted the shape of Elizabeth Green’s uterus. A cleft (bi-cornate? babies can and do move even in complete bi-cornate uteri... a cleft? Sheesh. Barely noticable.) in it made it unlikely the baby ever would have turned around, he said. And C-sections probably will be necessary in any future births, he said. (And what he says is true, of course.)
Green isn’t worried about that. She gave birth on a Wednesday, went home on Saturday and needed pain medication for less than a week. Around his one-month birthday, Manning was down to one overnight feeding and the family was enjoying her maternity leave.
Because, you know, sleeping through the night is a premium sign of a good baby that came from a perfectly ROUTINE cesarean section.
“My experience was great, really,” she said.
If she only knew.
And on to this one found on C. Everett Koop's site:
After a long and convoluted article talking about varying statistics, "Dr. Richard Frieder, an obstetrician-gynecologist at Santa Monica-UCLA Medical Center and a clinical instructor of obstetrics and gynecology at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles" (I wanted to get the whole title correct) said:
"The main complication of VBACs is not death but morbidity, such as blood transfusions, hysterectomy, infection, heart attack, stroke, kidney failure, the baby having low Apgar scores or brain hemorrhage," Frieder said. "All they are talking about is how many people lived or died. But they didn't measure complications. If they had looked at complication rates, there would have been a huge difference favoring C-section."
I just don't even know what to say. Who is this person thinking that having a cesarean lowers the rates of these complications? Do these doctors not even SEE what we see? Are they blind?
I just can't figure it out.
I am so, so saddened by all of this. So, so saddened.
All I can do is keep doing my part. Sometimes I feel pretty alone in that fight, though. Kudos to those who fight with me - beside, before and behind me.
We have to keep going. Women deserve our care and love.