Pregnant in America
Replies
-
37 weeks (before stretch marks get too bad)
BS... my stretch marks began to appear in the second trimester... long before 37 weeks.
For me, too.... but if you are vain, and the doctor will remove your baby before you explode, then you will believe him and get the baby out before those last few stretch marks appear in those last few weeks. Same as their (idiotic) reason for not breastfeeding because it makes their breasts droop, which really happens during pregnancy not during breastfeeding......0 -
had 2 grgeous, beautiful, intelligent, healthy babies via c-section for both my protection and their own. And, if I ever had another, bet your bottom dollar I'd do it exactly the same way. I'd do and give anything to save my babies.0
-
I had an emergency c-section.
What of it? Stay away from my vicodin!
What? Now someone is going to say I am not a real mother because I had a c-section? I wish you would....0 -
America actually has a much worse rate of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality than other 1st world countries; who mainly use midwifery led models of care with much lower rates of induction, caesarean, intervention, epidurals etc. Coincidence? Highly doubtful.
The reasons mothers and baby's die in 3rd world countries are complete polar opposites to in 1st world countries. CMACE found the highest causes of maternal death is actually 1. sepsis 2. mental health and 3. communication barriers such as not using interpreters with women who don't speak the language. In the 3rd world its as you say - things like labouring with baby stuck in a bad position and unable to get out.
The thing that gets confused is that emergencies during childbirth are generally always resolved in the 1st world - by forceps, caesarean etc. In the 3rd world they do not have skills, equipment, healthcare practitioners etc and so these emergencies lead to death.
Procedures that used to be carried out in life or death emergency situations have now become normal - oh look the baby might be big, lets just do some major abdominal surgery rather than letting you labour. Oh its twins. Gosh, people must NEVER have given birth to twins in the past, we must cut you open!!!! Etc.
In the 1930s there were only 3 medical indications for a caesarean - eclamspia, contracted pelvis and placenta praevia. Funny how now around 30% of women in the first world 'need' one
A. In 1930 65/1000 babies were dying. Now, it is 5.98. In Italy, where the c-section rate is over 40%, their mortality rate is 3.36.
B. Are you willing to let babies die just to drop that dreaded c-section rate down?? Would you rather see a c-section when something goes amiss or one when baby has died due to putting off a c-section?? Seriously, this is the option, here. Babies DIE.
C. In countries that utilize more midwifery led models, no, rates are not better. You have the Netherlands, with a 25/30% homebirth base where babies die more in the care of their midwives than they do in high risk units under doctors. And their midwives are educated and trained, unlike here.
D. No, we do not have worse maternal mortality rates than other first world countries. In Japan, theirs is higher than ours, and they are the mecca of technology. How does that happen?? And again, in Italy, the rate is the same, yet higher intervention rates. Hmmmm0 -
Thank you so much for posting this! I just found out my husband and I are expecting, and I am dead set on a natural child birth. They will have to fight me in order to get me to have a c-section..IT WON'T HAPPEN!!0
-
I had an emergency c-section.
What of it? Stay away from my vicodin!
What? Now someone is going to say I am not a real mother because I had a c-section? I wish you would....
I
you! 0 -
Thank you so much for posting this! I just found out my husband and I are expecting, and I am dead set on a natural child birth. They will have to fight me in order to get me to have a c-section..IT WON'T HAPPEN!!
I pray for you, sweetie! I hope it all goes well!0 -
Thank you so much for posting this! I just found out my husband and I are expecting, and I am dead set on a natural child birth. They will have to fight me in order to get me to have a c-section..IT WON'T HAPPEN!!
So if everytime you have a contraction your babys vitals crash your totally cool with waiting it out to see what happens0 -
Well let me tell you this, I don't really care what you think. It pisses me off to read this crap. My mother should have had a c section with my brother, but her doctor said she would be fine, and the end result of that, was my brother being mentally retarded due to those complications at birth. And seriously, who the hell do you think you are saying that women CHOOSE to have C sections because it is less painful? I have never had a C section, I gave natural birth to my son at 27 weeks (a trauma all in itself) but I do know how much longer the recovery is for a C section vs vaginal birth. It's more likely that the doctors are recommending their patients have c section. (I admittedly did not read past your first paragraph.) Think about things before you make ridiculous assumptions.0
-
Do you know what happens when a doctor/hospital/"midwife"/CNM/L&D nurse shoots for the lowest amount of c-sections while pushing for all vaginal deliveries??? Babies die or are brain damaged. Sad, but incredibly true. I do know women who had nurses in a hospital that SAW decels but denied mom a c-section and the babies are now dead. The homebirth crowd and their poorly undertrained and uneducated midwives try their darndest to prevent c-sections and transfers. What happens?? Oh, that's right, DEATH. Once your baby dies, that's it, no do-overs and it flipping sucks. I can promise that we would choose one hundred c-sections over our babies being gone.
Erm babies die or are brain damaged from normal deliveries? Babies can die in caesareans too, mothers can die, they could end up with an emergency total hysterectomy, the baby could end up cut, one of the biggest causes of maternal death is sepsis which can come from caesarean wounds, swabs get left inside of women and turn into a nasty infection, there are lower rates of breastfeeding which in turn lead to higher rates of infant illnesses and maternal cancers, higher rates of postnatal mental illess - another one of the biggest causes of maternal deaths
My daughter had the cord wrapped around her neck,everytime i had a contraction her heart rate dropped to nothing,my contractions were coming closer and more frequintly yet she wasnt moving and her vitales were crashing,but yeah totally a choice
Most babies are born with the cord around their neck at least once, or around their abdomen. It can be a problem occasionally (my second child had the cord round his neck too and would have needed a section if it had gone on much longer) however there are things you can try before resorting to a section - unfortunately in the US they don't have a midwifery led model of care and obstetricians prefer to jump right to surgery or intervention like forceps
so my daughters heart rate is slowing she not getting any oxegyn,basicly dying on the montiters infront of me,the cord was around her neck more than once,what exactly could they have tried? what could a mid wife have done to save my daughter?0 -
Thank you so much for posting this! I just found out my husband and I are expecting, and I am dead set on a natural child birth. They will have to fight me in order to get me to have a c-section..IT WON'T HAPPEN!!
Good luck! Make sure you don't sacrifice your baby's life in case you need a c-section.
[insult name calling here]0 -
By the way, OP way to bring this topic up.... it's just like discussing this crap with the psychos from babycenter....
wait did you come here from babycenter? If so, please GTFO....0 -
By the way, OP way to bring this topic up.... it's just like discussing this crap with the psychos from babycenter....
wait did you come here from babycenter? If so, please GTFO....
:flowerforyou:0 -
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.
Are we serious here? That makes no sense to be listed as a side effect because obviously the doctor doesn't give it to the woman 1 without HER consent and 2. until they are ready to start labor. it INDUCES labor, so that's not a side effect, it's the desired effect, and the doctor doesn't give it to the woman Until the delivery.
I was induced because I was a few days past my due date. I was induced only after my doctor ASKED ME what to I wanted to do, and I took the c section because after inducing for 2 days nothing was happening. With my "TERRIBLE" c-section I was up and moving same day, unlike 3 of my friends who had vaginal births with babies smaller than mine, who couldn't walk/roll over/sit up without tears coming to their eyes. I wouldn't for half a second complain that I took that c-section, and I took it like a champ!0 -
OP,
It should be pretty obvious at this point that women don't really ELECT to have surgery over natural child-birth. The belief that SO many women in America are electing this is purely propaganda. In recent years, the rich and famous have trended towards this, but like I said in the first post, they wouldn't be able to do this unless they were paying for the surgery out-of-pocket. No insurance would ever pay for an ELECTED c-section delivery.
And honestly, any woman who has had a c-section would tell you that if they felt that their child could be safely delivered naturally then they would have done so. Your choice was a unique case. While you might have wanted that surgery, I imagine that your doctor would have had to justify it to your insurance company in some way... unless the surgery was covered by private adoption. Either way, it is ignorant to use only one statistical increase to support the statement that women elect to have surgery. The rise in c-sections is not from elected surgeries, but from an increase in complicated deliveries and the medical industry's preference to ere on the side of caution. I would rather hear of an increase in c-section deliveries than increase in childbirth related deaths.
While I wish this was the thought process for many women, it truly isn't. It is for me- I'd much rather be natural and vaginal than an elective c-section. That said, many women do opt for a scheduled c-section without medical need if the option is given to them. So many of my friends have opted to do so, which is sad for me to hear. And, truly, they all admit there was no reason for it, other than they were "done" being pregnant and Friday was a good day to have the child. And, given enough drugs and enough help post-operation, a few of them would rather do it c-section than vaginal next time--- much more help around the clock for the first few weeks for them than with the vaginal birth scenarios. It makes me sad, truly it does.
I wish the OBs wouldn't give so many women the option for an elective c-section. And I do truly mean elective and not medically indicated (laboring toooo long, eclampsia, baby in distress, etc.). And to many of the women here, I don't think anyone is bashing you if you had a scary situation. I think people are frustrated with the truly elective portion of it.
Again... excluding the rich and famous... c-sections are only 'elective' if your first delivery was by emergency c-section. I could have had a VBAC, but my doctor felt more confident delivering by c-section. The risk of my death increased with a VBAC and my doctor preferred to do the c-section.... so I 'elected' to have a second c-section. I did get to choose to have my baby at 36 1/2 weeks. The doctor would only do it if her lungs were fully developed... which they were. I chose the timing of this because I was being laid off by my job due to a unit closure. They were required to give me 60 days notice. I received a benefit from that job that covered my salary up to 70% for the entire time I was on maternity leave. If I hadn't 'elected' for a c-section delivery, then I would have been laid off some time before the baby was born and would not have received full benefit that I had earned from that company.
Everybody has their reasons and those reasons are no one's concern but mom and doc. If she has the option of 'elective' surgery, it is for a reason. If the doctor is allowing her to deliver at 37 weeks, it is because he is certain that it won't impact the baby. Live and let live, people!0 -
By the way, OP way to bring this topic up.... it's just like discussing this crap with the psychos from babycenter....
wait did you come here from babycenter? If so, please GTFO....
This!0 -
:laugh: yeah reminds me of about half of the babycenter threads, only we need to start name calling over breastfeeding vs bottle, and compairing how much we drink:laugh:By the way, OP way to bring this topic up.... it's just like discussing this crap with the psychos from babycenter....
wait did you come here from babycenter? If so, please GTFO....
i think i you to:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: 0 -
Well let me tell you this, I don't really care what you think. It pisses me off to read this crap. My mother should have had a c section with my brother, but her doctor said she would be fine, and the end result of that, was my brother being mentally retarded due to those complications at birth. And seriously, who the hell do you think you are saying that women CHOOSE to have C sections because it is less painful? I have never had a C section, I gave natural birth to my son at 27 weeks (a trauma all in itself) but I do know how much longer the recovery is for a C section vs vaginal birth. It's more likely that the doctors are recommending their patients have c section. (I admittedly did not read past your first paragraph.) Think about things before you make ridiculous assumptions.
First, I'm sorry about your brother and it's not ok that they didn't do what was right during your mother's delivery.
Now, that being said...I've had a vaginal followed by a cesarean. I would have a million c-sections before I would ever have a vaginal again. I couldn't walk for 3 weeks after my vaginal delivery, and I was showering and walking around the hospital 10 hours after my cesarean. EVERYONE is different.0 -
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.
I'm in Canada, so the cost thing isn't an issue (yay, universal health care!), but I've had three children. My first was born in the States through vaginal birth. My second was born in Canada through c-section because I had polyhydramnios and he just floated in there like a cork. No descending at all. My third was also born in Canada. We tried a VBAC, but she had severe tachycardia, so I went in for a c-section.
I have to say, though, recovery the second time around was much faster. I'd have loved a home birth for my third, but it really was a good thing that we were in the hospital.
I have a few theories, though, as to why the c-section rate is up... and it goes beyond greedy doctors. 1.) People who were unable to get pregnant in the first place are now able to get pregnant and stay pregnant through the use of drugs. So now you're adding deliveries of people with fertility issues (which are often complicated, anyway) to those who are healthy. 2.) Complicated pregnancies can be safely carried to term in some cases... which also may result in a c-section.
A lot of those cases prior to the invention of modern medicine just may not have survived in the first place. Home birth can be a wonderful thing, and I do have online friends who have done it. But the thing is, it's not for everyone.0 -
I had 2 vaginal births with the epidoral.0
-
I had an emergency c-section after being on pitocin for 3 days and not dialating past an 8. My c-section incision got infected and sent me back to the hospital after just 7 days home with my son, due to the nurse wanting to get me discharged rather than letting the incision close up. I then had a massive allergic reaction from the IV antibiotics that were administered and subsequently almost died. Twice. My son was 9.9 when he was born and is a happy and healthy 18 month old now. The recovery from that c-section was brutal, and I mean BRUTAL. I wish I could have had him naturally, but **** happens.0
-
I will look for this documentary! Thanks for sharing.0
-
Thanks for sharing this. This is something that really interests me, especially as I am getting to the age where I want to start having children....... good to know
0 -
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 look at other countries where the health care is government run and completely NOT for profit, there is a major difference in the level of care available. Why is someone going to put themselves $200,000 into debt and study for years and years and years if they're not going to make a killing afterwards? If you want quality care, you have to invest in it. Just like if you want shoes that won't fall apart after 6 months, you have to be ready to pay big bucks for it.0 -
I don't understand the growing movement against c-sections. I was born in 1984. My mom tried to have me vaginally, but realized that something was wrong. She had to CONVINCE the nurse that something was wrong and to get the OBGYN. Fortunately, the OBGYN noticed that there was something wrong (wasn't sure what then), and had Mom go in for an emergency c-section. Turns out the umbilical cord was short and had wrapped around my neck. I'm really, really glad that she had the c-section. At that time, both of us probably would have died without the c-section.
My husband and I plan on trying for our first child soon. My goal is to find an OBGYN who truly communicates (listens and explains). I want to try to have the child naturally, but it will sure as heck be in a hospital where they can react if something goes wrong.0 -
My son was born with a tumor on his lung. They wanted him to be born naturally so that his lungs would be fully cleared. Mother Nature does a much better job than suction. However, 36 hours into labor....I would not/could not dialate any more. A C-section was necessary and my son was wisked away to ICU before I could even see him. He is healthy after surgery, I am healthy and I am glad for the C-section now. I have none of the problems that my sister has with bladder, scar tissue from episiotomy, or looser vaginal muscles. I would choose the c-section again, just not after 36 hours of labor. :flowerforyou: :flowerforyou:0
-
Each woman has the right to make the choice that works for her and her baby. It is a personal choice...
No matter what choice she makes she is still a mother...0 -
Well let me tell you this, I don't really care what you think. It pisses me off to read this crap. My mother should have had a c section with my brother, but her doctor said she would be fine, and the end result of that, was my brother being mentally retarded due to those complications at birth. And seriously, who the hell do you think you are saying that women CHOOSE to have C sections because it is less painful? I have never had a C section, I gave natural birth to my son at 27 weeks (a trauma all in itself) but I do know how much longer the recovery is for a C section vs vaginal birth. It's more likely that the doctors are recommending their patients have c section. (I admittedly did not read past your first paragraph.) Think about things before you make ridiculous assumptions.
First, I'm sorry about your brother and it's not ok that they didn't do what was right during your mother's delivery.
Now, that being said...I've had a vaginal followed by a cesarean. I would have a million c-sections before I would ever have a vaginal again. I couldn't walk for 3 weeks after my vaginal delivery, and I was showering and walking around the hospital 10 hours after my cesarean. EVERYONE is different.
So would you have c-section just to avoid the pain? If so then you should be responding to OP's statement : 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!0 -
This is what happens when you live in a country where healthcare is a business for profit, and not a universal right for everyone.0
-
I thought the rise in C-sections had something to do with the rise in obesity? I haven't read any studies on it or anything, so this is just speculation, but most, if not all, of the obese mothers I know gave birth via C-section; dunno if there's any correlation there.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions