I feel confident that at least most of the cesareans I have been associated with were actually necessary, many even life-saving. Yet looking back over my practice, I can easily pick out scores of women who surely would have had cesareans had they chosen care elsewhere.
One of my home-born babies had a wrinkle-free gentle entrance into our world. The other was an almost seven-minute shoulder dystocia. After three and a half minutes of CPR, he took hold of his life and is thriving. He has never been separated from mother.
Trying to write about the c-section I had 10 years ago with my second child is difficult.
VBAC. A victory and a relief for most of the women who have one. A deep and generous healing for many of them. And still, very much a sham, because most of the women never really needed to be cut in the first place, so they didn’t really need to be VBACs after all.
When the obstetrician said he would use Cytotec, the woman and her husband said they expected he would use prostaglandin gel but he said that he now uses Cytotec, as it is ‘more modern and reliable.’ They were not told Cytotec is not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for this purpose…
Women pregnant after a previous cesarean section have special needs and concerns.
…why not allow women the option to choose [caesarean section]? Unfortunately, the option to choose (or demand) is not that simple. CS, even when elective, carries serious risks for mother and baby.
Someone asked me what things are done differently with vaginal births after cesarean (VBAC) as opposed to a first baby. Midwives usually reply to this question with a reassuring, Oh, we treat you normally, but there are differences in the two situations that can be distinguished in midwifery practice.