I just read an article that said almost 1 out of every 3 babies in the U.S. is born by c-section. This strikes me as absolutely ridiculous. I understand that in some cases, both the baby and the mother would be in a lot of danger if she attempted to give birth vaginally (breach postion). But seriously, this sems to me to just be a case of way too many women being too scared to give birth naturally (dare I mention the word "wimpy"?), and opting for the easy way of just having the baby be cut out of them. Then, of course, there are the doctors who push c-sections on women because they don't want to have to stay for the hours long procedure of giving birth, and are too scared of sue-happy couples. I just don't get how so many women would rather go through an invasive surgical procedure that will leave them scars both on the uterus and the skin, complete with painkillers and anesthesia, instead of going through the the biological process that their bodies are equipped and designed for in the first place.

What do you guys think?

I don't have a problem with c-sections. Natural birth is said to hurt more and I guess I'd want the less pain. Also I wouldn't want to lose me baby.

quote:

Originally posted by YouthVoice:
I will give you this HL. The doctor was in fact pushing for a c-section. It seems he just wanted to get done with things as soon as possible. I find that to be careless and risky wether a c-section is that risky or not.

That's my main problem with C-sections as well YV, they get done simply for the convenience of the doctor or because the woman is afraid of giving birth.

Granted, Amp. But C-sections can take a process that is not complicated and make it complicated. The US is one of the worst for infant and mother mortality (among our "peer" countries) and our C-section rates are among the highest. Coincidence? No. Also, to defend my "major surgery," "A cesarean section is major abdominal surgery" quoted from this site http://www.childbirth.org/section/CSFact.html

Some numbers that might help:

US: 6.4 babies die per 1, 000 live births, c-sections account for about 25% of our births (the World Health Organization says that 10 to 15 is as high as any country should need to go)

Finland: 3.5 per 1, 000, I can't find a c-section rate but I know that it's lower

New Zealand: 5.8 per 1, 000, c-section rate is about 20%

UK: 5.1 per 1, 000, c-section rate is about 22%

Sweden: 2.8 per 1, 000, again no luck on c-section but I know that all the Scandinavian countries have low c-section rates

I've said it before, c-sections can and do save lives. They have their place, definitely.

My sister gave birth a year ago and she had to have a c-section because her baby was upside down in the womb, and wouldnt turn around. He's a very heatlhy baby now.

My other sister on the other hand had a baby last monday, my first niece ( I have four nephews). I believe she chose to have a c-section because she had already had two miscarriages and a surgery to clean her womb of the babies and was heartbroken. im not sure, but i think the doctors told her it would be better for the baby to be c-sectioned because of that past surgery. at the same time, she wanted also to be safe and not have to get her heart broken again.

That's why I believe it's a women's choice, because there are many reasons to having a c-section, whether it be for the mother's and baby's safety (as with my first sister) or for the mother's psychological/emotional safety (as with my second sister).

oh, and although it might be safer, c-sectioned mother has a longer recovery time than those with breach births.

quote:

As is natural birth, as is life

Thank you Amp.

I will give you this HL. The doctor was in fact pushing for a c-section. It seems he just wanted to get done with things as soon as possible. I find that to be careless and risky wether a c-section is that risky or not.

I liked reading all of this.
I think although we have developed and its great in a way that we can reduce the risks of deaths now it is not the be all and end all. I think a lot of people abuse our human intelligence, especially in this case for cosmetic sense or whatnot.

Anyhew, someone said "we've made it this far" and we have, so its great. People die a lot and thats nature, i believe thats the way the world should be. Perhaps having the ability to prolongue life so much and prevent deaths so well constantly will induce overcrowdings and one day will cause worser overall situations.

I believe c-sections are great for mothers who have babies over 10 pounds, i myself was a csection cause i was a heavy little kid. But for mothers who dont have complications i dont see the point in the c-section it just seems a waste.

If I had to chose between the two, isn't it obvious, natural birth has "natural" in it, it's a giveaway

Actually as thoracic surgeries go C-sections are at the bottom of the danger list. They're right next to appendectomies which are only dangerous if someone screws up with a scapel and knicks a major artery. That's removing an ORGAN not just cutting through some rather minor tissue layers to the remove the child. Sure cutting through some of that requires a delicate touch but it can be done by any moderatly good surgeon with minor scarring. You want capatilized MAJOR surgeries go talk to liver specalists or "chest crackers" (heart & lungs guys)

quote:

It's full of potentially lethal complications for the mom and the baby

As is natural birth, as is life

YV, the problem with a c-section is that it is major abdominal surgery. Read that again, MAJOR abdominal surgery. It's not something that should be done lightly. It's full of potentially lethal complications for the mom and the baby. Like I said before, it has it's place. But we use it way too lightly because most people don't realize how dangerous it really is.

My brothers girlfriend just gave birth to my niece two months ago and had a c-section. I think she was scared. Her water was already broken and she was ready but she decided on the c-section. I don't see anything wrong with that. It's a personal choice. So what if they are scared? You can't really say nothing until you are actually going through the same thing and every situation is different.

Okay, here's the plan: if you want to have a natural birth, go right ahead. Let other people do what they want and concentrate just on what you want.

Then the world will be a nicer place for everyone concerned. Except big-headed babies like me and Strangelove.

quote:

Originally posted by ampmaster:

quote:

Quite the opposite... it would be the totaly absence of manipulation of the gene pool. Iwould classify it as natural selection, which is what happens with all of the other species on this planet. But then again notice I am only posing a thought, not saying I htink we shoudl do this. I realise that it would be extremely cruel ( as a lot of the world is).

Alright let me rephrase. Doctors couldn't do it unless all those women refused treatment as is their right. We have a responsability by the Hippocratic oath to preserve life. So by allowing these women to either miscarry or themselves die we as medical professionals (i.e. MDs, RNs, EMTs, Paramedics, Etc) would have utterly failed in the role we hold in society. It wouldn't matter much because to hold ourselves to the basis of natural selection we as a human race would have to abandon the society which we have created.

you're exactly right. we would have to abandon the society we have created. but then again, the viewpoint of ishmael is that our whole society (not just any one aspect of it), is inherently flawed and i'm rather inclined to agree with him. damnit, its hard to explain the whole hypothesis behind my thoughts though. i'm not trying to be preachy here or naything, but i really do suggest that you read that book. even if if doesnt give you any epiphanies (dont worry, i'm not arrogant enough to expect that it will), you might at least see where i'm coming from.

quote:

Quite the opposite... it would be the totaly absence of manipulation of the gene pool. Iwould classify it as natural selection, which is what happens with all of the other species on this planet. But then again notice I am only posing a thought, not saying I htink we shoudl do this. I realise that it would be extremely cruel ( as a lot of the world is).

Alright let me rephrase. Doctors couldn't do it unless all those women refused treatment as is their right. We have a responsability by the Hippocratic oath to preserve life. So by allowing these women to either miscarry or themselves die we as medical professionals (i.e. MDs, RNs, EMTs, Paramedics, Etc) would have utterly failed in the role we hold in society. It wouldn't matter much because to hold ourselves to the basis of natural selection we as a human race would have to abandon the society which we have created.

quote:

Now I'm just disgusted at the mere thought of that Eugenics which I think this would count as (Eugenics=manipulation of the gene pool for the "supposed" betterment of the human race for those who haven't heard the term) is not okay under any circumstances

Quite the opposite... it would be the totaly absence of manipulation of the gene pool. Iwould classify it as natural selection, which is what happens with all of the other species on this planet. But then again notice I am only posing a thought, not saying I think we should do this. I realise that it would be extremely cruel (as a lot of the world is) to let people die when we have the technology to save them.


Ishmael is a book that was written by a man named daniel quinn back in the 70's and 80's ( he re-wrote it a few times). It's a rather fantastical story about a man who answers an ad in the local paper about people who want to save the world. he winds up taking ( is guess the best word is) philosophy lessons from a gorilla named ishmael who teaches him his perspective on human history and the overthrow on hunter-gatherers by agricultural society has led man on a selfish path that will eventually destroy the world. it does have some fascinating stuff about some of the old testament, and how it is tale from the hunter-gather perspective of being overthrown by the new farmers. sounds a bit out there, i know, but it is very well written, and even if you dont agree with a lot of the main principles, it has some very interesting concepts in it that makes it a very good read.

quote:

my mom had to have post-birth surgery because my skull was oddly large for a baby.

that's because you were a genius at birth Doc

quote:

higher maternal and infant mortality rates would kill off the people who have a harder time with birth, thereby leaving those who have an easier time giving birth to spread their genes more and eventually make it easier for everyone.

Now I'm just disgusted at the mere thought of that Eugenics which I think this would count as (Eugenics=manipulation of the gene pool for the "supposed" betterment of the human race for those who haven't heard the term) is not okay under any circumstances

quote:

sort themselves out naturally

why? it's easier and less of a human rights issue if we just correct it by surgery

quote:

Ishmael

what's that? bible chapter? opening paragraph of moby dick? what?

A kind-of related side-note here: has anyoen here read Ishmael? I read it for the first time recently, and I have to say, it had a strong influence in my whole perspective on things. It was amazing. In fact, I think I'm going to go read it again.

quote:

The way I see it, natural childbirth in humans is an evolutionary hiccup. It's way too inefficient (and dangerous) compared to childbirth in other mammals.

The reason that human birth is longer and harder is because we as a species got too smart, too fast, and figured out ways to save more people before evolution smoothed out the process on its own.

quote:

The infant has a hard time coming out, which can lead to increased infant and maternal mortality rates, and the labor lasts way too long.

I'm NOT saying I'm a proponent of this, but theoretically, higher maternal and infant mortality rates would kill off the people who have a harder time with birth, thereby leaving those who have an easier time giving birth to spread their genes more and eventually make it easier for everyone.



I know it's not very... sympathetic, but I'm starting to realise that I tend to view most human plights from a "survival of the fittest" perspective, in that although it might be heartwrenching to watch at the time, maybe its better for the whole of mankind to just let a lot of problems sort themselves out naturally in the first place, so that they will become less common as time goes on.

quote:

Originally posted by clpo13:

The way I see it, natural childbirth in humans is an evolutionary hiccup. It's way too inefficient (and dangerous) compared to childbirth in other mammals. The infant has a hard time coming out, which can lead to increased infant and maternal mortality rates, and the labor lasts way too long. If we had to worry about predators, nobody would ever finish getting born. Of course, the mortality rates are significantly less now than in centuries past thanks to improved medical procedures (and no one needs to worry about getting eaten while giving birth), but the fact still remains that many mothers still need some sort of assistance when giving birth. And nearly anyone will take painkillers when given the choice. I suppose the thing to do is figure out some sort of anesthesia that doesn't have the side effects epidurals apparently have.

This is all basically due to the size of our brains. The brain has grown faster than the birthing canal has over the course of evolution. This is probably because the bigger and more effective brains allow us to do wonderful things like kill off predators and develop sterile hospitals, ha.

This, however, doesn't change the fact that getting a c-section because "they don't want the pain" is irresponisble medicine.

For the record, my mom had to have post-birth surgery because my skull was oddly large for a baby.

Now I am not going to deny that sometimes women need a C-section. Sure they do. But not near as often as we have them in the US. I mean come on, a) if natural birth was so inefficient we wouldn't be here (yes yes, I know more women used to die during child birth but still, evolution works people), b) the rest of the world doesn't have near as many c-sections as we do and wow, whatdoyouknow, they're still around. Childbirth in the US is seriously messed up.

Heh, they had a hard time getting me out using both forceps and vacuum. There was no way I was coming out without help, and even when I did, I had massive bruises on my head and a pinched nerve that paralyzed one of my arms for a few weeks. (That's what being over 10 pounds gets you.) You can understand why my mom had c-sections for my two sisters following me. They were big babies, too.

The way I see it, natural childbirth in humans is an evolutionary hiccup. It's way too inefficient (and dangerous) compared to childbirth in other mammals. The infant has a hard time coming out, which can lead to increased infant and maternal mortality rates, and the labor lasts way too long. If we had to worry about predators, nobody would ever finish getting born. Of course, the mortality rates are significantly less now than in centuries past thanks to improved medical procedures (and no one needs to worry about getting eaten while giving birth), but the fact still remains that many mothers still need some sort of assistance when giving birth. And nearly anyone will take painkillers when given the choice. I suppose the thing to do is figure out some sort of anesthesia that doesn't have the side effects epidurals apparently have.

quote:

Originally posted by clpo13:
So we've established you don't like c-sections, but what do you think about things like epidurals for natural births?

I don't realy like them, and don't plan on having one when I have a kid someday. This is partially because epidurals lengthen the birthing process,and partially because they can interfere with breastfeeding, which I am a huge proponent of. I feel like if you want to have a kid, you should go the whole way. Sort of along the lines of, "buy the ticket, take the ride". Kind of harsh, maybe, but hey, that's how I see it. And while we're on the subject, I also disagree with episiotomies ( especially non-consent ones), forceps and vacuum assisted births, and induced labor.