Whats with the new growing trend of being too posh to push

metrovelvet

From what I was told by the hospital in the US, walking epidurals are not all they are cracked up to be and the name is misguiding. Additionally, because of the drug coctail that makes them up, can cause potential harm to the baby.

BostonB

embee wrote: »

You can walk. ....Some women report that the mobile epidural doesn't work and they can't walk. These things are variable, about as variable as regular epidurals. ....Most hospitals in Ireland don't offer mobile epidurals at the moment though.

You've gone from you can walk fine, to they may not work, to they all vary, and they're not available anyway. So from a sure thing to not such a sure thing.

embee

metrovelvet wrote: »

From what I was told by the hospital in the US, walking epidurals are not all they are cracked up to be and the name is misguiding. Additionally, because of the drug coctail that makes them up, can cause potential harm to the baby.

The drugs in any sort of epidural do not cross the placenta, therefore they have no side effects on the baby. Only drugs that cross the placenta (like pethidine) can affect the baby - some babies who have come into contact with pethidine are floppy and a bit lazy to breath when they're born.

BostonB wrote: »

You've gone from you can walk fine, to they may not work, to they all vary, and they're not available anyway. So from a sure thing to not such a sure thing.

You edited my post there very selectively, BostonB.

I never said that a mobile epidural was a sure thing. All I said that it is an alternative to standard epidural - I just replied to your post saying that if you have an epidural, you can't move. Very few if any of the pain relieving methods used in childbirth are bang on the money. Most women who opt for an epidural have it with no problems. All I was saying that a standard epidural is as variable in terms of its effectiveness as most other drugs (prime example - Entonox. I loved it. It makes other women feel dizzy and nauseous).

Don't start telling me what I am and am not saying by use of questionable editing of quotes, please.

tallaght01

embee wrote: »

some babies who have come into contact with pethidine are floppy and a bit lazy to breath when they're born.

when they come up with non-lazy-baby-breathing drugs for use during labour, I will personally hug the inventor

BostonB

embee wrote: »

Not strictly speaking true. There are mobile epidurals which allow women to walk, empty their bladders and sit up fine. ..

Selective editing???I'm only quoting the specific bit I'm responding to. If something works fine, I take that to mean it pretty much a sure thing.

Heres your parachute, works fine. Sorry I meant it usually works. Actually its quite variable, it might slow you down, a bit. But it might work fine.

metrovelvet

Then why EMBEE, did the hospital say that?

tallaght01

Metrovelvet, I think I might know what the hospital are talking about here.

In the past there has been concern about babies and epidurals. This was because epidurals can give a mother a high temperature during labour. A maternal high temperature can be "passed on" to the baby.

In the neonatal unit, if I have a baby with a high temperature, I can assume that it's just because the mother has a high temp....but what if the temp is due to an infection. How can we be sure? Well, we can't.

So, we have to go looking for an infection.

This involves some of the following, depending on the unit you work in

a) an intravenous drip and intravenous antibiotics for the baby for at least 2 days

b) A "suprapubic aspirate"....this is a way of getting a urine sample from the baby. It involves me sticking a needle through the baby's abdominal wall into the bladder and pulling some urine out

c) a lumbar puncture (or "spinal tap") which involves sticking a needle into the baby's spine to take some fluid out to test for meningitis

We do these tests often, mostly without incident. But they aren't without risks.

It had been thought for a long time that we were doing more of these tests on babies of mums who had epidurals, purely because their mums were more likely to have a high temperature, if that makes sense?

But, the studies have shown that we don't do any more of these invasive tests on kids born to mums who have an epidural.

I don't know why this is...possibly because the temp has usually settled by the time the baby is settled in the neonatal unit and has been evaluated?

embee

BostonB wrote: »

Selective editing???I'm only quoting the specific bit I'm responding to. If something works fine, I take that to mean it pretty much a sure thing.

Heres your parachute, works fine. Sorry I meant it usually works. Actually its quite variable, it might slow you down, a bit. But it might work fine.

BostonB, call it what you like. I call it selective editing. I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth that I neither said nor implied, so stop it.

metrovelvet wrote: »

Then why EMBEE, did the hospital say that?

How the hell am I supposed to know why you were told that? I don't know. I'm not a doctor or a mindreader, METROVELVET :rolleyes:. If you have an issue with you being told that, then contact the hospital. Epidural drugs do not cross the placenta and can't affect the baby.

BostonB

I don't think it makes sense to quote the whole comment, but since you do...

embee wrote: »

Not strictly speaking true. There are mobile epidurals which allow women to walk, empty their bladders and sit up fine. They aren't available particularly widely in Ireland, but they do exist and I'm sure it is only a matter of time before they are commonplace here.

No where in that do you say, it may not work.

embee wrote: »

You can walk. You might not be as quick and nimble on your feet (you wouldn't be exactly dancing in the aisles when you're in labour anyway), but you can walk. My cousin had one in the UK and said it was fantastic - she was walking around about 10 minutes after she had it. Some women report that the mobile epidural doesn't work and they can't walk. These things are variable, about as variable as regular epidurals. Some people have regular epidurals that take on one side of the body only, that leave a woman with too little sensation (can't feel crowning or urge to push), or don't take at all. Tis the same with any analgesic to be honest, what works for one woman won't work for the next etc (for example I found TENS crap but gas and air was my savour). The hospital I gave birth in doesn't offer them (but I wasn't having an epidural or spinal of any kind anyway). Most hospitals in Ireland
don't offer mobile epidurals at the moment though.

You only qualified what you meant by "fine" when called on it. Personally I wouldn't call what you describe in your 2nd comment as "fine".

FakeRedHead

Well, I only read the first 6 pages of this thread so I'm not sure if the OP is still looking for an answer to her question why women choose elective sections.

If she is, this is my reason.

I chose an elective section (yes, I went private and picked the doctor as I knew she would do it...). I picked this option as I thought it was the safest way for the baby to be born. I don't like suprises and I don't like babies getting into distress during delivery and staff faffing about while they lose oxygen etc.

I could cope with a c-section as I knew exactly what would be happening and I don't like pain that is not quantifiable.

Actually, and I can only speak for myself, it was a doddle. Took morphine for two days then a couple of paracetamol and I was walking about. Okay so I had a husband with ten days off which helps.

My baby arrived quickly and safely, scoring full marks on all the checks they do upon birth and is the healthiest thing ever since. I had no complications or infection.

So I have a slight scar...I don't care. My child was born in a safe, controlled, organised fashion with two surgeons and three mid-wives assisting. I just felt it was the way to go to avoid errors.

I am so grateful I did it this way and wasn't put off by people who were shocked at the idea of a woman actually being able to choose her method of delivery.

embee

BostonB wrote: »

You only qualified what you meant by "fine" when called on it. Personally I wouldn't call what you describe in your 2nd comment as "fine".

BostonB,

You are getting tied down in pedantics. For me to say you can walk "fine" when you're in labour is a relative thing. No woman can walk what your idea of "fine" is when she's labouring, epidural or not. If you have nothing further to add (other than picking at every word I say and tangling yourself up in a big ball of pedantics) to the original topic, then don't post at all.

The topic here is elective caesareans, and you and I have both been guilty of dragging it off-topic - it stops now.

BostonB

Elective caesareans is misnomer as it includes situations where effectively no choice has been made as is implied by "too posh to push". I made that point earlier about the stats being misleading for the same reason. People should be aware that medical staff often use terms that don't mean quite the same thing as they do in non medical use, and you can always ask for a 2nd opinion, for another educated best guess.

Ellen Ryan

I did it because I did not want to pee myself everytime I laughed for the next 60 years or any other number of extremly unpleasant side effects of vaginal birth... i have a small scar that is 2 1/3 inches long and took nothing more than a couple of advils afterward. My child is a dream and very happy - no negative impacts becuase of this.

I had my child in NYC and my insurance payed for all of the costs for the c section aside from about 200 Euros. Insurance in the US actually pays most or all of hospital / doctors visits / prescrition medication costs.

littlebug

Ellen Ryan wrote: »

I did it because I did not want to pee myself everytime I laughed for the next 60 years or any other number of extremly unpleasant side effects of vaginal birth...

Thanks for sharing Ellen. It is interesting to see what motivates the choices women make.
However I do want to point out to any first time mothers to be that such side effects are not inevitable. Having had 2 babies vaginally I have yet to pee myself laughing:D I also didn't have any pain or problems whatsoever "down there" afterwards. These things can happen to some women but not everyone.

Actually to me the thought of being cut open was much scarier! I wonder what it is that makes women form such different views on childbirth Did any of your friends or relatives have c sections or particularly nastly side effects form natural births?

ravydavygravy

My wife recently had a public elective c-section, but it was not really elective since the baby was breech. She was very worried beforehand but in hindsight, it was quick, relativly painless and she felt fine about a week after the surgery. She was only on tylex (parecetemol + codeine) for post-op analgesia, and that worked for her. There were tons of staff in the OR, and she felt well looked after the whole time. I was also allowed in for the birth...

It changed her opinion of elective sections for sure.

Kernel32

ravydavygravy wrote: »

My wife recently had a public elective c-section, but it was not really elective since the baby was breech. She was very worried beforehand but in hindsight, it was quick, relativly painless and she felt fine about a week after the surgery. She was only on tylex (parecetemol + codeine) for post-op analgesia, and that worked for her. There were tons of staff in the OR, and she felt well looked after the whole time. I was also allowed in for the birth...

It changed her opinion of elective sections for sure.

Out of interest, for anyone who did have a c-section, how did the taking of pain killers afterwards impact the ability to breast feed or if it even was advised based on how much pain killers you were on?

ArthurDent

Kernel32 wrote: »

Out of interest, for anyone who did have a c-section, how did the taking of pain killers afterwards impact the ability to breast feed or if it even was advised based on how much pain killers you were on?

Had a section on my last child - I was feeding her 20 minutes after she was delivered - was really keen to ensure milk supply was well established. The took my off my morphine after 12 hours and gave me suppositories for the next 5 nights - after I came home from hospital I took tylex for about 3 days - didn't have any effect on my ability to feed. 15 months later still feeding my little one. She is my third so that probably helped - I have heard that many first time mothers who are sectioned find breastfeeding difficult

ex_infantry man

Ellen Ryan wrote: »

I did it because I did not want to pee myself everytime I laughed for the next 60 years or any other number of extremly unpleasant side effects of vaginal birth... i have a small scar that is 2 1/3 inches long and took nothing more than a couple of advils afterward. My child is a dream and very happy - no negative impacts becuase of this.

hi ellen my girlfriend had a csection 2 years ago it was an emergency at 36 weeks. even now when she laughs or coughs she pees and when she needs to go to the loo she literally has two minutes to get to a toilet. she definately wants a normal delivery next time as she wants to be able to walk, pick up the baby and pee without too much pain!!her scar is minimal but thats just cosmetic

metrovelvet

I had one also in NYC after a failed induction and the babys heart rate dropped. I swelled up to enormous immobile proportions. The nurses faces dropped when they walked into the room. I was on morphine, the vicodin, and couldnt move to get to the baby. And my legs were too heavy fro the swelling to lift them up onto the bed. It was awful.

I wanted everything to be au natural. Not ONE thing happened during the birth that I wanted to. EVERYTHING had intervention. Oh well I got to choose what television station could be on at the time.

Insurance covered everythig, except for the blood transfusion that showed up on a bill that I didnt know I had.

I had initial colostrum but no let down. In my unprofessional opinion I think my body was too toxic to feed/

Hrududu

Did any of your friends or relatives have c sections or particularly nastly side effects form natural births?

I can chip in with an anecdote on this. A relative of mine has had an elective section. She was terrified of giving birth and found a consultant who would do it. There were no complications, the recovery had no hitches, the baby was perfectly healthy. Looking back on it now she wouldnt have it any other way.

A good friend of mine had a horrendous time giving birth naturally. So horrendous that the baby ended up dying.

Now I know that these are only 2 stories, and I'm sure someone else will have friends/relatives with directly opposite experiences. But from a personal point of view if I were to get pregnant I would give serious thought towards having an elective.

embee

Hrududu wrote: »

I were to get pregnant I would give serious thought towards having an elective.

Hrududu,

If you're in Ireland, most hospitals won't just offer an elective unless there's a reason for it.

Just on the topic of people having negative experiences from either c-section or a vaginal delivery.... there are negatives behind each if you ask enough women. Some women sail through c-section. Some have a lot of complications. The same applies to vaginal birth. I had an induced vaginal delivery and, whilst I had no major complications, I did have some minor complaints afterwards. To this day I still have lower back pain - something I never had until I gave birth. I didn't even have lower back pain through the pregnancy, so labour and delivery are the culprit.

Nevyn

Well it can take at least two years for your pelvis to re algin it's self after a birth and 'droped' hips is normal after a birth.

metrovelvet

embee wrote: »

Hrududu,

If you're in Ireland, most hospitals won't just offer an elective unless there's a reason for it.

Just on the topic of people having negative experiences from either c-section or a vaginal delivery.... there are negatives behind each if you ask enough women. Some women sail through c-section. Some have a lot of complications. The same applies to vaginal birth. I had an induced vaginal delivery and, whilst I had no major complications, I did have some minor complaints afterwards. To this day I still have lower back pain - something I never had until I gave birth. I didn't even have lower back pain through the pregnancy, so labour and delivery are the culprit.

That could be the cause of any number of things,aside from labour, such as bad technicianship during an epidural.

I had pins and needles in my back and no sensation in various parts of my body and it could have been from the epi or the general anesthetic.

embee

metrovelvet wrote: »

That could be the cause of any number of things,aside from labour, such as bad technicianship during an epidural.

I had pins and needles in my back and no sensation in various parts of my body and it could have been from the epi or the general anesthetic.

Considering the fact that I didn't have an epidural, I think it is fairly safe to say that labour and delivery is to blame for my backache.

LuckyStar

girlwitcurls wrote: »

yes your correct, you would see a surge of women going for elective sections and demanding to be induced to be home in time for christmas.

My mother had me a few days after Christmas, naturally, with no drugs (they were against Holles Street policy). Those women would probably be horrified at the thought!

nayrttocs

Does anyone know the stats on whether these 'elective sections' are to women who already have had a child?? or to women on their first birth?

I am all on for natural but lost my first little boy 3 days after he was born. (severe cp due to lack of oxygen - decision to cs me was made too late - no doctor in the room).

Therefore on my next I wanted a c section and was granted one. Anyone who has gone through a trauma on their first born and ended up having a section for whatever reason and feel anxious about their next birth do seem to be given elective sections. I know of women who have had to have sections on their first, didn't like the section process and delivered naturally on their second.

I also know of a lot of women who did ask on their first for a section but were refused.

embee

nayrttocs wrote: »

Does anyone know the stats on whether these 'elective sections' are to women who already have had a child?? or to women on their first birth?

I am all on for natural but lost my first little boy 3 days after he was born. (severe cp due to lack of oxygen - decision to cs me was made too late - no doctor in the room).

Therefore on my next I wanted a c section and was granted one. Anyone who has gone through a trauma on their first born and ended up having a section for whatever reason and feel anxious about their next birth do seem to be given elective sections. I know of women who have had to have sections on their first, didn't like the section process and delivered naturally on their second.

I also know of a lot of women who did ask on their first for a section but were refused.

Hi nayrttocs,

First of all, I am sorry to hear about your little boy - it is just so tragic when preventable situations like these occur and it pains me to read of it still happening in this day and age

I would imagine (but it is very, very hard to find national stats to back this up) that a lot of the women who have elective sections would be multiparous (women who've had previous births). I say this purely for the reason that if you have a section on your first, you are very, very likely to be offered a section on your second and subsequent births, particularly if your pregnancies are relatively close together.

That is just my personal opinion though - I could be wrong, but its so hard to find national stats on this!

BostonB

In our experience a natural delivery is really pushed for in the maternity hospitals we've been in, indeed they pulled out all the stops to make it happen on our last one.

mysterymeme123

Would they allow a woman to have a c section for psychological reasons sush as tokophobia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_of_childbirth

My other suffered 3rd degree tears on me and 4th degree tears on my sister.Surely there is nothing natural about a womans vagina being mutilated like that. As far as I am concerned thats what it is mutilation. Two of my friend have had two children each. Each one had one c section and one vaginal birth . Both vaginal deliveries went smoothly as did both sections yet the two girls both said they would choose a section if they were to have another.One said she thought an elective section wouldn't be possible so she has decided she isn't having anymore children.

Why is it hat women insist on having independence equality and the right to do and be all she can YET when it comes to childbirth she is told no no no silly little woman this is the way it is and you don't have the right to choose what happens to your body. you are simply too vain to understand.

Some women have a real fear of birth not based in vanity but in real terror.Well, it's real to them and if these women feel more comfortable emotionally having a c section then who has the right to say no love you are just being silly and vain I know whats best after all I have a white uniform.

If there was a natural event that could potentially cause serious lacerations to a penis you can be damned sure the man would be given an alternative and everything would be done to prevent damage.

A woman in entitled to decided what happens to her and her body.

embee

mysterymeme123 wrote: »

Why is it hat women insist on having independence equality and the right to do and be all she can YET when it comes to childbirth she is told no no no silly little woman this is the way it is and you don't have the right to choose what happens to your body. you are simply too vain to understand.

A woman in entitled to decided what happens to her and her body.

Ireland lags behind Europe and most of the western world when it comes to choice in maternity care. Homebirth rates are virtually non-existent. Birthing centres don't exist. C-section rates and assisted delivery rates are on the rise, largely in part to fear of litigation. There is little if any continuity of care in the public service - there is a "conveyor belt" system of sorts. Women don't have choices in Ireland the way women in the rest of Europe do. Things can and will change, but it will take a long time.

I don't think any doctor or midwife worth their salt would be so dismissive of a woman to turn around to her and tell her she doesn't have a choice, and I don't think that many doctors or midwives would make an assumption that a fear of childbirth is automatically linked to vanity.

When I was full term, I had choices. I was offered induction at 8 days over but said no. By the time I was 12 days over, I was aching all over and wanted the pregnancy to be over, so I gladly took induction. I had choices though - I chose what pain relief I wanted, what positions I wanted to be in, that I wanted to be mobile and walking around during my labour, and I got all of that.

Women do have choices in childbirth - as long as they birth in the "system".