C-section vs Vaginal induction

[Anonymous]

I've been given the option based off of our complicated pregnancy to do an elective C-section at 38 weeks or trial of labor if I wish with an induction.

My initial thought is if my water happens to break on its own I would attempt a trial of labor ( no forceps or vacuum and pivot to a section the first sign of distress for baby) but if not and we reach induction date I'd prefer a planned section.

I'm not tied to a vaginal birth experience even though this is likely our one and only. My main concern is getting baby out the safest most efficient way without causing her any distress.

I know in the best case scenario vaginal birth is "better" for baby and a better recovery but what about not best case. I know labor can stall and baby can have complications if stuck or say placental abruption or uterine rupture, or 3rd and 4th degree tearing or other complications my body. And other risks for C-section - respiratory issues and higher bleeding risk for me although baby has been given beta for lungs already and I'm already a hemorrhage risk so they at least know that and will be prepped.

For those who have done both - what recovery was better? What did you feel was safest for your baby? And how do you feel when comparing the two.

Ultimately I think I'm comfortable with our plan and I do believe a planned section will be way more controlled and easier than an emergency section but I have a few more days to weigh my options.

Also did anyone get a tap block or use a pressure wound after their C-section?

[Anonymous]

You might want to report your own post and have it moved to the infants page. You will probably get more responses there. This page skews older kids.

[Anonymous]

I can’t speak to everything, but I had an “elective” c section due to a (very stubborn) breech. It was a really great experience (well, as far as having your uterus sliced open). It was calm, and I had our midwife team with us. My request was that the air be light, and everyone in the room brought their A game, joking and poking fun at each other.

I had a really good recovery, but did too much too soon and ended up with some clotting issues weeks down the road. For me, I went home on naprosyn and Tylenol for pain, but I know that’s not everyone’s experience. I did have some issues with the anaesthetic., but that’s because it was discovered in the OR that I had a spinal curvature. I was still having trouble moving and feeling one side the following morning but nothing that time and help didn’t get me through.

I know this isn’t exactly your questions, but the c-section story can be a good one. DD did have some extra fluid in her lungs for a day or two, but not enough that she couldn’t be in room with me.

I just also want to point out that hemorrhage can also happen after vaginal birth. I had one friend for whom this was life threatening.

Honestly, do what feels best. A c section is not a failure or the worst thing in the world. You’ll read some judgemental stuff online about them, but it’s actually not as easy as people thug, nor as terrible.

[Anonymous]

Getting an induction was the worst decision I’ve made in my life and that’s not an exaggeration. Understand it goes well for the majority of people, but when it doesn’t - it really really doesn’t (and probably ends in c-section anyway). You’ll get a variety of responses, none should be that applicable to you though because birth is different for every single person and every person has a different risk profile. Find a doctor you trust and make a plan with them.

[Anonymous]

I feel like inductions are fine for anybody who has given birth vaginally already, but for FTMs they often end in unplanned or emergency C-sections. If I had to choose between a C-section after a TOL or a planned C, I would definitely choose the planned C.

[Anonymous]

I would go for a c section, since that is what you are leaning to already. I had scheduled inductions with my 2nd and 3rd (just for ease of scheduling) and it went fine, but I’ve read that induction is hardest with a first pregnancy, and also we didn’t have any risk factors ahead of time. Also, part of the reason I didn’t elect to do a c section with my 2nd was bc I didn’t know how I would deal with lifting and caring for my 1 year old at home while recovering. That is not a worry for you.

[Anonymous]

I had an induction that went very smoothly (didn’t even need pitocin) but if I had a complication that the doctors thought merited a c-section, I would definitely take it. A planned c section is safer for the baby and low risk for the woman.

[Anonymous]

I had a vaginal birth with my first and a planned c-section at 36 weeks due to placenta previa with my second. I had a hemorrhage but the doctors were able to handle it, and the baby spent a week in the NICU before going home. Aside from the first time I stood up to get out of bed in the hospital, I much preferred the c-section recovery. I got to spend a bit of extra time in the hospital recovering, less pain and mess, and over faster for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like inductions are fine for anybody who has given birth vaginally already, but for FTMs they often end in unplanned or emergency C-sections. If I had to choose between a C-section after a TOL or a planned C, I would definitely choose the planned C.

So much wrong with this. Inductions in FTM’s do not “often” end in c sections. OP should follow her medical advice for her specific situations but what you are saying is just factually wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like inductions are fine for anybody who has given birth vaginally already, but for FTMs they often end in unplanned or emergency C-sections. If I had to choose between a C-section after a TOL or a planned C, I would definitely choose the planned C.

So much wrong with this. Inductions in FTM’s do not “often” end in c sections. OP should follow her medical advice for her specific situations but what you are saying is just factually wrong.

If you think 36% of the time (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/birt.12286) isn't "often" then we disagree on the meaning of words. That's plenty "often" for me to use the word in an online discussion board, particularly compared to the 14% rate for multiparous women (note: this study actually found it was 42% of FTMs that end up with a C-section after induction - still not often enough for you? https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01213.x#:~:text=The%20emergency%20cesarean%20section%20rate,3.02)%20(Table%202).)

OP was asking for advice from commenters, not her doctor. And that's what I provided (now with statistics and citations for the peanut gallery!). You can provide your own advice or move along, but you can't shout me down with accusations of factual inaccuracy that are not true.

[Anonymous]

OP wrote

iknow in the best case scenario vaginal birth is "better" for baby and a better recovery but


- there should not be any quotes around better. Vaginal deliver IS better for both baby and for recovery.

We all know the obvious benefits of vaginal delivery. The c-section should only be used for true emergencies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like inductions are fine for anybody who has given birth vaginally already, but for FTMs they often end in unplanned or emergency C-sections. If I had to choose between a C-section after a TOL or a planned C, I would definitely choose the planned C.

So much wrong with this. Inductions in FTM’s do not “often” end in c sections. OP should follow her medical advice for her specific situations but what you are saying is just factually wrong.

If you think 36% of the time (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/birt.12286) isn't "often" then we disagree on the meaning of words. That's plenty "often" for me to use the word in an online discussion board, particularly compared to the 14% rate for multiparous women (note: this study actually found it was 42% of FTMs that end up with a C-section after induction - still not often enough for you? https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01213.x#:~:text=The%20emergency%20cesarean%20section%20rate,3.02)%20(Table%202).)

OP was asking for advice from commenters, not her doctor. And that's what I provided (now with statistics and citations for the peanut gallery!). You can provide your own advice or move along, but you can't shout me down with accusations of factual inaccuracy that are not true.

Inductions actually LOWER your risk of a c section compared to waiting for labor.

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/induced-labor-39-weeks-may-reduce-likelihood-c-section-nih-study-suggests

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like inductions are fine for anybody who has given birth vaginally already, but for FTMs they often end in unplanned or emergency C-sections. If I had to choose between a C-section after a TOL or a planned C, I would definitely choose the planned C.

So much wrong with this. Inductions in FTM’s do not “often” end in c sections. OP should follow her medical advice for her specific situations but what you are saying is just factually wrong.

If you think 36% of the time (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/birt.12286) isn't "often" then we disagree on the meaning of words. That's plenty "often" for me to use the word in an online discussion board, particularly compared to the 14% rate for multiparous women (note: this study actually found it was 42% of FTMs that end up with a C-section after induction - still not often enough for you? https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01213.x#:~:text=The%20emergency%20cesarean%20section%20rate,3.02)%20(Table%202).)

OP was asking for advice from commenters, not her doctor. And that's what I provided (now with statistics and citations for the peanut gallery!). You can provide your own advice or move along, but you can't shout me down with accusations of factual inaccuracy that are not true.

Inductions actually LOWER your risk of a c section compared to waiting for labor.

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/induced-labor-39-weeks-may-reduce-likelihood-c-section-nih-study-suggests

You're trying to quote the ARRIVE study, which is specifically limited to induction at 39 weeks for low-risk pregnancies. OP is talking about a "complicated pregnancy" and based on my reading (which may be incorrect, it's a bit vague) an offer of an induction at 38 weeks.

[Anonymous]

I think for a first time mom not planning to have any more kids, a planned c makes a lot of sense. Inductions can be great, but first time vaginal birth is really hard and can be risky. The main worry with c sections is damage to your uterus and impact on future pregnancies—which doesn’t matter much if you’re not planning on any more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think for a first time mom not planning to have any more kids, a planned c makes a lot of sense. Inductions can be great, but first time vaginal birth is really hard and can be risky. The main worry with c sections is damage to your uterus and impact on future pregnancies—which doesn’t matter much if you’re not planning on any more.

What is this crap? First time vaginal births is not “really hard” nor “risky” for the majority of women. What is this crazy pro c section agenda?