Winter solstice party
5 hours ago
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
C-sections and VBAC's
Below is a excerpt from an article regarding C-sections and VBAC's (vaginal birth after cesarean). This being a soapbox of mine, I thought it interesting to post. The fact that the C rate in the USA is higher now than EVER before....and yet there is NO better outcome in babies says a lot...and says very loudly....MOST C-section are unnecessary and dangerous....having a C triples your rate of death and complications.
Why should VBAC work in America? American obstetrics doesn't work! What can you even begin to say about a country with an American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) conference entitled "Promoting Medically Unnecessary Cesarean Sections"? We rank 24th in the world: 23 other countries have better birth outcomes than we do. And the countries with the best outcomes use midwives and encourage out-of-hospital births. Many obstetricians didn't understand certain aspects of successful VBAC—excellent nutrition, the absence of fear, the importance of the energy in the birth room, and faith in the birth process. Many of them told women they had to have their babies by 40 weeks, or they would be induced. Since more and more women were having/demanding VBACs, that was where the money was, and doctors began to get more comfortable with the idea. For doctors, VBACs equaled more time with less money, less power and less control. OBs who were attending VBACs were merely "baby catchers"—something any ol' midwife could do; performing surgery was lucrative and awe-inspiring. They could schedule cesareans at a time that was convenient for them, instead of possibly being disturbed in the middle of the night. They couldn't understand what was so important about a vaginal birth, and they oftentimes used scare tactics to get women to…agree to schedule a repeat cesarean. They accused women who wanted normal deliveries of compromising the health and well-being of their babies for their own aggrandizement and at the expense of their babies. Of course nothing could be further from the truth. …The more comfortable they became with VBAC, the more risks they began to take. Before, no one ever induced a VBAC woman, and certainly no one every used Pitocin, but now, Pitocin was used frequently. There has been an increase in uterine rupture with the advent of induction and Pitocin. I find it incomprehensible and wicked that instead of understanding how obstetrical directives create problems and decrease the safety of VBAC, obstetricians in the United States believe that the danger is inherent within VBAC. In fact, it has come to our attention that instead of taking the time to suture the incised uterus in layers, doctors have been taught a "short cut" technique that uses only one layer. This method compromises the integrity of the scar and predisposes a woman to greater incidence of uterine rupture. So now they can tell you with a straight face that VBAC is dangerous: they are making it so. …Life has risks. Not everyone who plans a VBAC will have one, and not everyone who has one will have a perfect experience. Some women who desperately want VBACs end up with repeat cesareans. But after almost 30 years of researching, writing, counseling and teaching cesarean prevention and VBAC, I know that most women can have safe, gentle, sacred, delicious VBAC births, and that they are safer than repeat cesareans. It is a travesty that the majority of sections and repeat sections are unnecessary. It is a tremendous sadness when women have been so indoctrinated with fear about birth that they choose numbness and technology to "get the baby out" rather than their own power and efforts. — Nancy Wainer, excerpted from "A Butcher's Dozen," Midwifery Today Issue 57
Why should VBAC work in America? American obstetrics doesn't work! What can you even begin to say about a country with an American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) conference entitled "Promoting Medically Unnecessary Cesarean Sections"? We rank 24th in the world: 23 other countries have better birth outcomes than we do. And the countries with the best outcomes use midwives and encourage out-of-hospital births. Many obstetricians didn't understand certain aspects of successful VBAC—excellent nutrition, the absence of fear, the importance of the energy in the birth room, and faith in the birth process. Many of them told women they had to have their babies by 40 weeks, or they would be induced. Since more and more women were having/demanding VBACs, that was where the money was, and doctors began to get more comfortable with the idea. For doctors, VBACs equaled more time with less money, less power and less control. OBs who were attending VBACs were merely "baby catchers"—something any ol' midwife could do; performing surgery was lucrative and awe-inspiring. They could schedule cesareans at a time that was convenient for them, instead of possibly being disturbed in the middle of the night. They couldn't understand what was so important about a vaginal birth, and they oftentimes used scare tactics to get women to…agree to schedule a repeat cesarean. They accused women who wanted normal deliveries of compromising the health and well-being of their babies for their own aggrandizement and at the expense of their babies. Of course nothing could be further from the truth. …The more comfortable they became with VBAC, the more risks they began to take. Before, no one ever induced a VBAC woman, and certainly no one every used Pitocin, but now, Pitocin was used frequently. There has been an increase in uterine rupture with the advent of induction and Pitocin. I find it incomprehensible and wicked that instead of understanding how obstetrical directives create problems and decrease the safety of VBAC, obstetricians in the United States believe that the danger is inherent within VBAC. In fact, it has come to our attention that instead of taking the time to suture the incised uterus in layers, doctors have been taught a "short cut" technique that uses only one layer. This method compromises the integrity of the scar and predisposes a woman to greater incidence of uterine rupture. So now they can tell you with a straight face that VBAC is dangerous: they are making it so. …Life has risks. Not everyone who plans a VBAC will have one, and not everyone who has one will have a perfect experience. Some women who desperately want VBACs end up with repeat cesareans. But after almost 30 years of researching, writing, counseling and teaching cesarean prevention and VBAC, I know that most women can have safe, gentle, sacred, delicious VBAC births, and that they are safer than repeat cesareans. It is a travesty that the majority of sections and repeat sections are unnecessary. It is a tremendous sadness when women have been so indoctrinated with fear about birth that they choose numbness and technology to "get the baby out" rather than their own power and efforts. — Nancy Wainer, excerpted from "A Butcher's Dozen," Midwifery Today Issue 57
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
