Don't I sound like a celebrity newshound?
Christina gave several interviews (or one that was spread around the world, but paid her money to say they interviewed her personally) and in it, she explains her reasons for having a PLANNED 37 WEEK CESAREAN.
I'm sitting here shaking my head, wondering who educates these people? Don't they have someone who has some statistical knowledge explaining things to them? I just don't get it.
In part (emphasis mine):
I didn’t want any surprises,” she told People mag of the week 37 decision to go under the knife to have Max. “I’d heard horror stories about [vaginal] tearing. I had heard horror stories of women going in and having to have an emergency C-section [anyway].
I really wanted a calm and peaceful environment. The hardest part was deciding on his birthday. I wanted to leave it up to fate, but at the same time I was ready to be done early!
The C-section was “more painful than she thought [it would be]” and a “sore” Christina had to stay in the hospital for four days.
I wonder if she knew she might be surprised with an accidentally nicked bladder? A baby whose face could be scarred for life? A hemorrhage that could kill her? I wonder if she knows the "surprise" that she might have serious issues ever having a baby again? That she could have major complications during a subsequent pregnancy because of the cesarean "choice" she made? I wonder if anyone explained to her the nerves that were severed might never re-connect again and that she might not feel sensation for years and years, if ever.
I wonder if anyone bothered to tell her the physiologic benefits of a baby being born vaginally - AND TERM.
It's just sad to me that someone with such a high profile can (possibly) influence others to "cut to the chase" and schedule early cesareans. "Christina did it! I want to have my baby NOW, too!"
I can just hope someone in her sphere tells her about VBAC and she goes on to have a glorious, high-profile VBAC - shouting it from the rooftops!
I can always dream.