Pregnant in America

Foxypoo61287

I just finished watching this documentary on Netflix. It has opened my eyes about being pregnant in America. There are so many things that I NEVER knew about. Health Care or the world states that C-sections should not rise over 15%. In 1975 C-section births were 7%. Now AMERICA it is close to 30%. Why are women electing to have MAJOR surgery? Just to not have any pain? Like seriously. Don't have a kid if you don't want to deal with the pain!

Did you know that 90% of hospitals use a drug called "Cytotec". Do you know what they are using it for? To induce labor. Do you know who the FDA & the Drug Manufacturer say not to use this drug on. Pregnant women. SO why would they use a drug that CLEARLY STATES do not use if pregnant or breastfeeding. Here are some warnings found about this drug:

WARNINGS
CYTOTEC (MISOPROSTOL) ADMINISTRATION TO WOMEN WHO ARE PREGNANT CAN CAUSE ABORTION, PREMATURE BIRTH, OR BIRTH DEFECTS. UTERINE RUPTURE HAS BEEN REPORTED WHEN CYTOTEC (misoprostol) WAS ADMINISTERED IN PREGNANT WOMEN TO INDUCE LABOR OR TO INDUCE ABORTION BEYOND THE EIGHTH WEEK OF PREGNANCY (see also PRECAUTIONS and Labor And Delivery) CYTOTEC (misoprostol) SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN BY PREGNANT WOMEN TO REDUCE THE RISK OF ULCERS INDUCED BY NONSTEROIDAL ANTI-INFLAMMATORY DRUGS (NSAIDs) (see CONTRAINDICATIONS, WARNINGS, and PRECAUTIONS)
PATIENTS MUST BE ADVISED OF THE ABORTIFACIENT PROPERTY AND WARNED NOT TO GIVE THE DRUG TO OTHERS.
Cytotec (misoprostol) should not be used for reducing the risk of NSAID-induced ulcers in women of childbearing potential unless the patient is at high risk of complications from gastric ulcers associated with use of the NSAID, or is at high risk of developing gastric ulceration. In such patients, Cytotec (misoprostol) may be prescribed if the patient
has had a negative serum pregnancy test within 2 weeks prior to beginning therapy.
is capable of complying with effective contraceptive measures.
has received both oral and written warnings of the hazards of misoprostol, the risk of possible contraception failure, and the danger to other women of childbearing potential should the drug be taken by mistake.
will begin Cytotec (misoprostol) only on the second or third day of the next normal menstrual period.

So why are OUR doctor's who constantly try to keep our "health" in mind, give us medications that endanger us. Why are doctor's SO EAGER to push a C-section? Because it's planned. They can deliver 6 babies, in 4 hours. Starting at 7 am. They are out of the office for the day by noon! Do you know the average cost of a C-section in America? In 2007 it was close to $15,000. 2009 Close to $16,000. That does NOT include anesthesia, newborn care or anything. Some hospitals even charge XXX amount a day for the room you are in. And with a C-Section you are in longer than when you have a normal delivery. A normal delivery is approx 9 to $10,000.00.

Read this. This is really CRAZY!
http://www.moneyhelpforchristians.com/average-cost-of-delivering-a-baby/

This one too:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2684033/


So why are we letting these health care providers bully us into elective surgery so that 1.) They can make more money. And 2.) They can "get our deliveries over sooner."

I had a VBAC and was urged by my doctors that I needed to have a c-section. My daughter was born healthy. I was fine. What would you choose? I'd choose the same route if not even a home birth for my next child.

Elizabeth_C34

I'll take a look at the documentary when I can. Thanks for sharing.

p0pr0cksnc0ke

Had two c-sections. Have two healthy kids and I recovered amazingly both times. Scary drugs and all.

susannamarie

I'd put the blame more on the risk of lawsuits than on greed.

UsedToBeHusky

You have GOT to be kidding me! Do you honestly think major surgery isn't PAINFUL?? Unless you are paying for your own healthcare ceasaerean delivery is NEVER elective!!!

EDIT: I actually stopped reading at your first paragraph. If you have had a VBAC, then how the HELL can you sit here and say that women elect surgery because it is less painful than childbirth? Don't you remember how different the recoveries were?

And another thing... who says women are being bullied? If someone tells you, you can do A but there is risk that you or your baby could die or you can do B which we are much more confident that the risk to you and your baby is significantly less, then what would you choose?

Shannon2714

I had my first son vaginally and had major trauma...so I had my second via c-section. I can understand some reasons why c-sections are necessary, but to push them on women to the point of making them feel like they HAVE to do it is just wrong.

Oh, and my total hospital bills after having my second son was over $30,000....

KaleidoscopeEyes1056

Heh, I might go on my own little rant for a second, but here it goes:

What's also ridiculous is that after the woman has the child, there's no guarantee that she will be able to resume her job. There is absolutely no job security for women during or after pregnancy. In fact, my friend's mom got fired from her job while she was still pregnant, because the company didn't want to wait for her to recover and come back to work. Go America and your "family values."

As for the C-section, it's an unnecessary surgery and the fact that it's being pushed onto mothers just so the doctors can get more money is horrible. Since when did our health become for profit? Oh yeah, I forgot, us women are second class citizens, so of course our health is not a guarantee. Same with the poor, the disabled, the elderly, etc.

RDalton84

I know this was discussed in the other post that I created yesterday but I agree. I am completely sickened and outraged by this. I also had a c-section with my first due to Pre-Eclampsia at 32 weeks. When I had that c-section my OB/GYN reassued me that if I wanted to have a natural birth with my next one I would be able to, and I did. Two and half years later I went full term with my second baby and delivered him after 12 hours of labor. I am just very lucky that I have an OB that doesn't jump right into a c-section. My sister has the same OB and when she had her first child her water broke before she was in active labor and she didn't want any pitocin (she wanted to go into active labor on her own) and her doctor was fine with that. They were closely monitored and she said as long as mom and baby aren't in any distress she was happy to let her continue and she labored for 3 days before she finally had the baby. As long as I am having babies I will never use another OB.

mslack01

I had a C-section because my daughter's heartbeat was irregular and they tried to induce and nothing was happening. So I had the scary drugs and the surgery. Didn't choose it electively and didn't even know that you could. It was just a necessary means to save her.

carrie_eggo

I think the C-Section rate is high because of 3 things:
1. Fear of getting sued over complications of a prolonged labor and delivery
2. Health insurance standards (just guessing here)
3. Convenience for the doctor

RDalton84

Heh, I might go on my own little rant for a second, but here it goes:

What's also ridiculous is that after the woman has the child, there's no guarantee that she will be able to resume her job. There is absolutely no job security for women during or after pregnancy. In fact, my friend's mom got fired from her job while she was still pregnant, because the company didn't want to wait for her to recover and come back to work. Go America and your "family values."

As for the C-section, it's an unnecessary surgery and the fact that it's being pushed onto mothers just so the doctors can get more money is horrible. Since when did our health become for profit? Oh yeah, I forgot, us women are second class citizens, so of course our health is not a guarantee. Same with the poor, the disabled, the elderly, etc.

If you work for a company that participates in FMLA (depends on the size of the company) you are guaranteed 12 weeks off without the threat of losing your job. However they do not guarantee you will go back to the EXACT same job but it has to be equivalent. And of course that 12 weeks is without pay unless you use sick, vacation, or short term disability. I do wish that is something we could change in this country.

magichatter06

Heh, I might go on my own little rant for a second, but here it goes:

What's also ridiculous is that after the woman has the child, there's no guarantee that she will be able to resume her job. There is absolutely no job security for women during or after pregnancy. In fact, my friend's mom got fired from her job while she was still pregnant, because the company didn't want to wait for her to recover and come back to work. Go America and your "family values."

As for the C-section, it's an unnecessary surgery and the fact that it's being pushed onto mothers just so the doctors can get more money is horrible. Since when did our health become for profit? Oh yeah, I forgot, us women are second class citizens, so of course our health is not a guarantee. Same with the poor, the disabled, the elderly, etc.

http://www.everydayhealth.com/pregnancy/101/tip/fmla.aspx

I thought that maternity leave was covered under FMLA act...however I see now there are restrictions....

carrie_eggo

Did you know that 90% of hospitals use a drug called "Cytotec". Do you know what they are using it for? To induce labor. Do you know who the FDA & the Drug Manufacturer say not to use this drug on. Pregnant women. SO why would they use a drug that CLEARLY STATES do not use if pregnant or breastfeeding. Here are some warnings found about this drug:

WARNINGS
CYTOTEC (MISOPROSTOL) ADMINISTRATION TO WOMEN WHO ARE PREGNANT CAN CAUSE ABORTION, PREMATURE BIRTH, OR BIRTH DEFECTS. UTERINE RUPTURE HAS BEEN REPORTED WHEN CYTOTEC (misoprostol) WAS ADMINISTERED IN PREGNANT WOMEN TO INDUCE LABOR OR TO INDUCE ABORTION BEYOND THE EIGHTH WEEK OF PREGNANCY (see also PRECAUTIONS and Labor And Delivery) CYTOTEC (misoprostol) SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN BY PREGNANT WOMEN TO REDUCE THE RISK OF ULCERS INDUCED BY NONSTEROIDAL ANTI-INFLAMMATORY DRUGS (NSAIDs) (see CONTRAINDICATIONS, WARNINGS, and PRECAUTIONS)
PATIENTS MUST BE ADVISED OF THE ABORTIFACIENT PROPERTY AND WARNED NOT TO GIVE THE DRUG TO OTHERS.
Cytotec (misoprostol) should not be used for reducing the risk of NSAID-induced ulcers in women of childbearing potential unless the patient is at high risk of complications from gastric ulcers associated with use of the NSAID, or is at high risk of developing gastric ulceration. In such patients, Cytotec (misoprostol) may be prescribed if the patient
has had a negative serum pregnancy test within 2 weeks prior to beginning therapy.
is capable of complying with effective contraceptive measures.
has received both oral and written warnings of the hazards of misoprostol, the risk of possible contraception failure, and the danger to other women of childbearing potential should the drug be taken by mistake.
will begin Cytotec (misoprostol) only on the second or third day of the next normal menstrual period.

So why are OUR doctor's who constantly try to keep our "health" in mind, give us medications that endanger us.

Cytotec is used for other things too....they have to put those warnings on it because if it was prescribed to a pregnant woman for another use it could induce labor.

A quick google search brought me this info on Cytotec's indications:

"Cytotec (misoprostol) is indicated for reducing the risk of NSAID (nonsteroidal anti inflammatory drugs, including aspirin)–induced gastric ulcers in patients at high risk of complications from gastric ulcer, e.g., the elderly and patients with concomitant debilitating disease, as well as patients at high risk of developing gastric ulceration, such as patients with a history of ulcer. Cytotec (misoprostol) has not been shown to reduce the risk of duodenal ulcers in patients taking NSAIDs. Cytotec (misoprostol) should be taken for the duration of NSAID therapy. Cytotec (misoprostol) has been shown to reduce the risk of gastric ulcers in controlled studies of 3 months' duration. It had no effect, compared to placebo, on gastrointestinal pain or discomfort associated with NSAID use."

If you are pregnant, you should not take Cytotec for an ulcer....that is all the warning is for.

vim_n_vigor

Well, let me tell you my story.

When I was pregnant with my first, 3 days before my due date, my blood pressure started rising. I was exhibiting the early signs of pee-eclampsia, but was still in a safe range. The doctor elected to induce labor. If only I knew what was coming, I never would have agreed. It started off with the administration of multiple drugs to induce the labor. It was extremely painful, but they could not get me to go into active labor. After about 12 hours, they broke my water manually. OMG!!! That was one of the worst feelings in my life! At that point, I was no longer allowed to move around, even to go to the bathroom and they inserted a catheter. I could no longer handle the pain and asked for pitocin. Several hours later - still not in labor, they administered too much of the pitocin and almost killed me and my son. My BP was 30/40. I was rushed into the OR for an emergency c-section. It took a few more hours for them to get my BP back up high enough that I could even move any of my body. It was horrible. I was so cold. Not cold like going out into the snow cold without the proper clothing, cold all the way through my body. My son spent this time getting his breathing regulated and other tests to ensure he was ok. It took months to recover to a point that I would say I felt at all normal.

My youngest was born 21 months later. I was all set to have a natural birth until the doctor walked through all the ways the two of us could die because of my increased risk of death due to previous c-section. I panicked and scheduled a c-section for him as well. At least that one went smoothly and I felt as normal as one can with a newborn within a few days.

I strongly believe that c-sections here are more for the doctors convenience than anything else. Many doctors begin by asking to schedule them. If I knew then what I do now, that doctor would not have been allowed to try inducing. No one was in any danger at that point. What they did do put us both in danger.

saintspoon

Heh, I might go on my own little rant for a second, but here it goes:

What's also ridiculous is that after the woman has the child, there's no guarantee that she will be able to resume her job. There is absolutely no job security for women during or after pregnancy. In fact, my friend's mom got fired from her job while she was still pregnant, because the company didn't want to wait for her to recover and come back to work. Go America and your "family values."

As for the C-section, it's an unnecessary surgery and the fact that it's being pushed onto mothers just so the doctors can get more money is horrible. Since when did our health become for profit? Oh yeah, I forgot, us women are second class citizens, so of course our health is not a guarantee. Same with the poor, the disabled, the elderly, etc.

If you work for a company that participates in FMLA (depends on the size of the company) you are guaranteed 12 weeks off without the threat of losing your job. However they do not guarantee you will go back to the EXACT same job but it has to be equivalent. And of course that 12 weeks is without pay unless you use sick, vacation, or short term disability. I do wish that is something we could change in this country.

OMG OMG OMG!!!

America is CRAZY!! In Canada... as long as you have worked a certain amount of hours prior to the leave you are given 12 months maternity leave which can be split/shared with you partner (perternity leave). Duiring this time you are gaurenteed (I believe) up to 70 % of your wage up to $50,000. Your position must be ready & available when you get back to work.... totally against the law to lose your position. Of course you don't HAVE to take the full12 months & can return at any time before.

God bless Canada :flowerforyou:

Shannon2714

Also, just in my case....my first labor was 28 hours. After 16 hours they took my husband outside and told him to make arrangements to bury both his wife and his child. Our son came out with an APGAR score of 2. He was blue and not breathing. Thank God, his 5 minute APGAR score was a 9 and he is an amazingly healthy, beautiful boy now....but, the day I was induced, the OB at the practice said that my BP was 220/180 and that I needed to have a c-section due to pre-eclampsia. The doctor at labor & delivery felt he knew better and it almost cost our lives.

I do agree that in most/a lot of cases, they are doing cesarian's for the wrong reasons....but in some, they are very necessary.

I totally get what you're saying and agree with 98% of it! :-)

angryguy77

Heh, I might go on my own little rant for a second, but here it goes:

What's also ridiculous is that after the woman has the child, there's no guarantee that she will be able to resume her job. There is absolutely no job security for women during or after pregnancy. In fact, my friend's mom got fired from her job while she was still pregnant, because the company didn't want to wait for her to recover and come back to work. Go America and your "family values."

As for the C-section, it's an unnecessary surgery and the fact that it's being pushed onto mothers just so the doctors can get more money is horrible. Since when did our health become for profit? Oh yeah, I forgot, us women are second class citizens, so of course our health is not a guarantee. Same with the poor, the disabled, the elderly, etc.

Did she work at the place long enough to qualify for FMLA?
I do have to ask why it's the employer's problem the person couldn't comeback in time? I know it sounds heartless, but the company exists to make money and deliver a service to it's customers, not to serve its employees. After saying this, it's not a place I would want to work for or patronize, but I do believe the employer should have that right.
Health care has always been about profit, that's why hospitals have charged more than what it costs to provide the service.

AlbaAngel25

I had a c-section. By no means was it optional. My daughter was in breach position and there was no other way to get her out. As for recovery, i recovered Exceptionally well. I was up and walking/moving very quickly.

allison0820

My C-section wasn't elective.... I had high blood pressure and was trying to deliver a 9lb 11oz baby.. so they didn't give me a choice... .. and I've never had a vaginal delivery.. but my friends who have seemed to be back up on their feet alot quicker than I was with a C-section.. so I don't really think it's the easy way out.... just sayin...

Foxypoo61287

You have GOT to be kidding me! Do you honestly think major surgery isn't PAINFUL?? Unless you are paying for your own healthcare ceasaerean delivery is NEVER elective!!!

EDIT: I actually stopped reading at your first paragraph. If you have had a VBAC, then how the HELL can you sit here and say that women elect surgery because it is less painful than childbirth? Don't you remember how different the recoveries were?

And another thing... who says women are being bullied? If someone tells you, you can do A but there is risk that you or your baby could die or you can do B which we are much more confident that the risk to you and your baby is significantly less, then what would you choose?

My C-section was not for an pain tolerance reason. It was emotional. I elected to have a C-sect because I was placing my son for adoption. If I would have had a normal delivery, I would have backed out.

danifo0811

Most c section I know of are for an actual reason. All my friends who had them had them because of complications in delivery. online I see people being offered them for large babies (don't totally agree with) or for a breech baby. I do see inductions being offered for non medical reasons and I disagree with that.

I do find the increase shocking but I wonder how much of that is because risks are being detected because of increased monitoring during labour and ultrasounds. My husband was breech but now they want that to be a csection. Also, once you have a csection many places will not let you VBAC or insist that you go into labour with no induction before your due date.

My preference is for as little intervention as possible. Both my labours were unmedicated. However, baby safety is my primary concern. I would never forgive myself if something happened to the baby because I didn't want a c section and I turned the doctors down when they asked. if I heard the baby was in distress I would do whatever the doctor reccomended.

The whole time off after is crazy. I'm Canadian so an equivalent position is guaranteed for a year.

UsedToBeHusky

You have GOT to be kidding me! Do you honestly think major surgery isn't PAINFUL?? Unless you are paying for your own healthcare ceasaerean delivery is NEVER elective!!!

EDIT: I actually stopped reading at your first paragraph. If you have had a VBAC, then how the HELL can you sit here and say that women elect surgery because it is less painful than childbirth? Don't you remember how different the recoveries were?

And another thing... who says women are being bullied? If someone tells you, you can do A but there is risk that you or your baby could die or you can do B which we are much more confident that the risk to you and your baby is significantly less, then what would you choose?

My C-section was not for an pain tolerance reason. It was emotional. I elected to have a C-sect because I was placing my son for adoption. If I would have had a normal delivery, I would have backed out.

I'm really surprised they let you elect a C-section for that reason. When I had my kids, it wasn't elective. Maybe that is where my confusion comes in. But, I honestly don't think there are women who would elect surgery as an alternative to the pain of natural childbirth. The pain of C-section lasts much longer, years in some cases, and can cause other issues. My last C-section resulted in endometriosis which is a lifetime of pain. I would never have elected to do C-sections if I didn't think that it was best for the safety of me and my children. I trusted my doctor's judgment and I don't think I should be crucified because of it. That is why topics like this are so sensitive to me. It seems like in our modern society that mothers get blamed for far more than they really deserve.

SofaKingRad

I think the C-Section rate is high because of 3 things:
1. Fear of getting sued over complications of a prolonged labor and delivery
2. Health insurance standards (just guessing here)
3. Convenience for the doctor

4. Keeps things tighter. Nawwimsayin?

GasMasterFlash

rossi02

With any medical interference you have to assist in labor & delivery.. there are risk.

You get an epidural, your odds go up of needing poticin to help stalled labor from your body not feeling the contractions.

You get pitocin, your odds of having a c-section increase from your body not responding fast enough, or how it's expected.

They break your water for you, rather than spontaneous.. they tell you if you don't deliver within 24 hours of that, your risk of infection goes up.

While these things can be the difference of life or death in needed situations.. they seemed to be used a lot when there isn't a medical need for them.

UsedToBeHusky

:laugh: :laugh:

OMG HA HA HA AT LEAST ITS NOT ANOTHER TOM THREAD CAUSE THOSE ARE SO NOT FUNNY, RIGHT? OMG HA HA HA!

jnagy9886

Some people should just keep their thoughts to themselves. And one other thing...its nobody else's business whether a person does or does not have a c-section.

scs143

I think there is a rising trend in allowing the patient to chose a c-section and that is a problem. C-sections are major surgery and should be used in situations that medically call for them- pre-eclampsia, rapidly rising blood pressure, a baby that did not turn properly, breathing/heart rate issues etc...

I don't think doctors are opting for c-sections because of their fear of getting sued. I am a plaintiff's medical malpractice attorney. There are more complications associated with major surgery- no matter how routine, than there are with natural childbirth.

I had a c-section with my twins for medical reasons- twin A was breech and would not turn. I had a natural birth with my oldest. I would choose natural birth over surgery any day of the week- for pain considerations, recovery period and risk.

snoopytwins

I had a VBAC and was urged by my doctors that I needed to have a c-section. My daughter was born healthy. I was fine. What would you choose? I'd choose the same route if not even a home birth for my next child.

:ohwell:

Mandykinz2008

I watched this documentary a few weeks ago. Definitely convinced me I want natural and drugless. I will be in a hospital, but I don't agree with c-sections for scheduling purposes!

rextcat

to the op ::coughcoughBS!coughcough::

all right here are my unfortunaite stories (TMI WARNING)
baby #1 my water broke on wensday, went to hospital, got sent home from said hospital because i wasnt "progressing" as fast as they liked. thursday ....was unpleasent, friday went back to same hospital at 2 am, was FINNALY admited. i told them i did not want a pit drip after i had "read up on" dilivery prosedures and was imedatly give pitocin:mad: and told that since they had started it it could not be stoped..wich is a bunch of BS. refused epidural(they kept asking me to get one) for 6 hours, then the doc came in and "manualy" dialated me, so oh yeah i got an epidural then and it was FRIGGIN AWSOME,at about 8 or 9 it was the big time and.......4 1/2 %@&()(@&$*@&$*@$ hours later they(standing room by only now since it was a teaching hospital) tried forsepts, and a vacume, the head doc finnaly agread with me that #1 was not coming out and i could get a c-sec. !!!yeah!! 1 hour later i get to see(not hold) my 9lbs #1 ill save the c-sec details, as they are WAY TMI,:laugh: altho instead of the doc saying "grats its a ____" i got "MY GOD THAT A BIG HEAD!!, hey tell _____ to come see this kids head...." :laugh:
after i get home my c-sec gets infected and bursts before i can get back in to see my doc, and takes about 3 months to heal....

baby#2 new doc realy realy realy wanted me to scedual a c-sec, i said no. everything was going awsome! like omfg awsome natural, barely any pain with the contractions awsome, then the nurse was ordered to give me a pill that if i had not been a vbac would have just soften my cervics, how ever in vbac's when your given this it causes your scar to open and you run the risk of death... so, we never got to hear from that doc again, and the head of labor and dilivery personaly apologized to us. we ended up haveing to have the c-sec any way because #2 turned and was coming out butt first. this time i got to hold my baby right after tho!! and once again i got infected and took for ever to heal.

my point is that only after you have a "difficult" pregnacy or dilivery do they start to push for a c-sec, but oh yeah they push and push you to get an epidural, pitocin and the like. AND IN NO WAY IS ANY TYPE OF CHILDBIRTH TOTALY PAINLESS!