Did you have a c-section? What were the reasons?

[Anonymous]

See? I don't want to sue my doctor. I want to sue whoever is applying the pressure. ACOG? The hospital? Both?

(Mostly kidding, but I seriously feel like the doctor did exactly what they're supposed to do with a woman who comes in looking for a vaginal delivery. And then they're put in this compromising position by hospitals that want to brag about their low c-section rates.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I elected for one because C-section babies are so much cuter. They aren't all squished and I had no desire to go through labor, medicated or otherwise. I had an awesome experience and I recommend it to everyone. These people with tears and stitches and everything sound awful. Recovery was great and I looked great and had a beautiful, smooth-skinned, non-squished baby, it was perfect.

One flaw in this argument: you had a large tear and stitches across your pelvis too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had preeclampsia. They induced first, and I got to 9.5 cm and pushed hard for close to four hours, but she was a big baby (8lbs 12oz), and she wasn't moving, and the doc really wanted to get me on magnesium for the preeclampsia.

Wow, you're so lucky that they were able to induce you and let you labor before starting the magnesium. Magnesium is why I gave up and consented to the C-Section. They started the mag as soon as I was admitted, and after 12 hours I was in excrutiating and unrelenting pain from the magnesium headache, so much worse than pitocin contractions. I had only progressed 1cm, and when the doc said I would need to stay on the mag for at least 12 hours after delivery as well and it would probably be 24 more hours before I'd progress enough to push, I gave up. I couldn't take the pain in my head anymore.

Hope your little one is okay. After a 2 week NICU stay, mine was fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had preeclampsia. They induced first, and I got to 9.5 cm and pushed hard for close to four hours, but she was a big baby (8lbs 12oz), and she wasn't moving, and the doc really wanted to get me on magnesium for the preeclampsia.

Wow, you're so lucky that they were able to induce you and let you labor before starting the magnesium. Magnesium is why I gave up and consented to the C-Section. They started the mag as soon as I was admitted, and after 12 hours I was in excrutiating and unrelenting pain from the magnesium headache, so much worse than pitocin contractions. I had only progressed 1cm, and when the doc said I would need to stay on the mag for at least 12 hours after delivery as well and it would probably be 24 more hours before I'd progress enough to push, I gave up. I couldn't take the pain in my head anymore.

Hope your little one is okay. After a 2 week NICU stay, mine was fine.

Why was she lucky? She pushed for 4 hours and then ended up with a c section anyway. This is exactly the experience I wanted to avoid - a difficult labor and then still a surgery, which was a likely scenario in my case, so I went for the cs right away (I had was in the early stages of HELLP when I had to deliver). I can understand that people prefer a vaginal birth, but I wouldn't call someone with a failed attempt "lucky".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:See? I don't want to sue my doctor. I want to sue whoever is applying the pressure. ACOG? The hospital? Both?

(Mostly kidding, but I seriously feel like the doctor did exactly what they're supposed to do with a woman who comes in looking for a vaginal delivery. And then they're put in this compromising position by hospitals that want to brag about their low c-section rates.)

I think it's a combination of market forces and reflexive anti-csection attitudes. Look around here, people just ask about csection rates and they make decisions about what doctor they want to use based on those rates. I think that's the OP here was doing. They don't ask why. It's just a focus on the one number, even though you should really be looking at the average maternal age, average maternal weight, percentage of IVF/twins, etc, to get a true sense (of course that's not published, but that has a huge impact on these numbers and should make most people take the blind number with skepticism). But nobody cares about the other factors. They just look at the number and will avoid hospitals/doctors with high numbers. Also I think a lot of women have bought into magical thinking about birth.

I think doctors feel pressure to get csection rates down because of this. I also think the only way to get that number down is to have women who are healthy labor for longer periods of time than they might have in the past. Mothers are getting older and fatter so the risk factors go up for those women, thus leading to a more likely section. That means the numbers have to come down from other people.

I had a csection after 30+ hours, most of it unmedicated labor. I was not pressured into it. My doctor mentioned the possibility but told me that he'd be willing to wait it out with me. I finally decided I was too exhausted and asked for one. No regrets, my only regret is I waited as long as I did. My baby was large and malpositioned, and now I think I dodged a bullet. Some of my friends who had long pushes after long labors with big babies have had issues years later that I don't have. I have one friend who thinks her very long labor and pushing (vaginal birth) has caused the serious mental issues her son deals with.

If I were a healthy mom in a long labor now, I sort of worry that I'd be seen as a possible way to get the section rate down, regardless of whether that process causes long-term damage to the mom and/or the baby. I think in a few years we're going to see a resurgence of birth injuries that we didn't use to see as a result. But hey, that magic number will be down.

[Anonymous]

Prior surgery, so the C-section was highly advised.

[Anonymous]

nerve damage lady here. yep, on paper, i looked far healthier and thinner than your average 30-year-old, despite my age.

and donor egg, but singleton birth. he got stuck behind a bone and got injured himself. he's ok now, thank God.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:See? I don't want to sue my doctor. I want to sue whoever is applying the pressure. ACOG? The hospital? Both?

(Mostly kidding, but I seriously feel like the doctor did exactly what they're supposed to do with a woman who comes in looking for a vaginal delivery. And then they're put in this compromising position by hospitals that want to brag about their low c-section rates.)

I think it's a combination of market forces and reflexive anti-csection attitudes. Look around here, people just ask about csection rates and they make decisions about what doctor they want to use based on those rates. I think that's the OP here was doing. They don't ask why. It's just a focus on the one number, even though you should really be looking at the average maternal age, average maternal weight, percentage of IVF/twins, etc, to get a true sense (of course that's not published, but that has a huge impact on these numbers and should make most people take the blind number with skepticism). But nobody cares about the other factors. They just look at the number and will avoid hospitals/doctors with high numbers. Also I think a lot of women have bought into magical thinking about birth.

I think doctors feel pressure to get csection rates down because of this. I also think the only way to get that number down is to have women who are healthy labor for longer periods of time than they might have in the past. Mothers are getting older and fatter so the risk factors go up for those women, thus leading to a more likely section. That means the numbers have to come down from other people.

I had a csection after 30+ hours, most of it unmedicated labor. I was not pressured into it. My doctor mentioned the possibility but told me that he'd be willing to wait it out with me. I finally decided I was too exhausted and asked for one. No regrets, my only regret is I waited as long as I did. My baby was large and malpositioned, and now I think I dodged a bullet. Some of my friends who had long pushes after long labors with big babies have had issues years later that I don't have. I have one friend who thinks her very long labor and pushing (vaginal birth) has caused the serious mental issues her son deals with.

If I were a healthy mom in a long labor now, I sort of worry that I'd be seen as a possible way to get the section rate down, regardless of whether that process causes long-term damage to the mom and/or the baby. I think in a few years we're going to see a resurgence of birth injuries that we didn't use to see as a result. But hey, that magic number will be down.

+1000. You really nailed it.

[Anonymous]

I wonder if there are studies out there tracking labor/push times and later injuries.

[Anonymous]

Breech with 4th child at age 39, couldn't hold him in any longer, and couldn't get him out. They tried to turn him INSIDE me, it was the most painful thing I had ever felt. So, they did a c-section. It was wonderful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had preeclampsia. They induced first, and I got to 9.5 cm and pushed hard for close to four hours, but she was a big baby (8lbs 12oz), and she wasn't moving, and the doc really wanted to get me on magnesium for the preeclampsia. [/quote
They put me on mag during labor, which is pretty common. Was that not an option for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had preeclampsia. They induced first, and I got to 9.5 cm and pushed hard for close to four hours, but she was a big baby (8lbs 12oz), and she wasn't moving, and the doc really wanted to get me on magnesium for the preeclampsia.

Wow, you're so lucky that they were able to induce you and let you labor before starting the magnesium. Magnesium is why I gave up and consented to the C-Section. They started the mag as soon as I was admitted, and after 12 hours I was in excrutiating and unrelenting pain from the magnesium headache, so much worse than pitocin contractions. I had only progressed 1cm, and when the doc said I would need to stay on the mag for at least 12 hours after delivery as well and it would probably be 24 more hours before I'd progress enough to push, I gave up. I couldn't take the pain in my head anymore.

Hope your little one is okay. After a 2 week NICU stay, mine was fine.

Why was she lucky? She pushed for 4 hours and then ended up with a c section anyway. This is exactly the experience I wanted to avoid - a difficult labor and then still a surgery, which was a likely scenario in my case, so I went for the cs right away (I had was in the early stages of HELLP when I had to deliver). I can understand that people prefer a vaginal birth, but I wouldn't call someone with a failed attempt "lucky".

PP here. Lucky that they didn't put her on the magnesium before the trail of labor. For me, magnesium was torture. It may have saved my life, but I wish I had understood what I was signing up for before doing a trial of labor with magnesium on board. (In fairness, my killer headache was the #1 symptom that I had full blown pre-eclampsia, so perhaps mine was worse than what some people experience.)

In the end, you're right. A failed trial of labor is a failed trial of labor. Both of ours failed. But I have a live child, and I'm alive, so that's what's important, I know. Way down the list is my disappointment that I won't ever experience vaginal birth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had preeclampsia. They induced first, and I got to 9.5 cm and pushed hard for close to four hours, but she was a big baby (8lbs 12oz), and she wasn't moving, and the doc really wanted to get me on magnesium for the preeclampsia.

They put me on mag during labor, which is pretty common. Was that not an option for you?

I too started the mag and the pit at the same time. I was so out of it that the pit didn't seem bad, even all the way up.

[Anonymous]

How can I ensure I only get one unless medically necessary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How can I ensure I only get one unless medically necessary?

You can't.

What you can do, however, is find a medical care provider you trust.