Uneccesary C-section immoral?

[Allegra]

Show me a man who refuses to work if it means he will sweat, and I’ll show you a man who is spiritually unhealthy.

That dog doesn’t hunt. There is no indication that a woman who chooses an epidural would refuse to have children if that wasn’t available. You are okay with a man choosing air conditioning to do his work in, but not with a woman choosing a drug to ease her pain and stress in labor. You are being incredibly inconsistant.

 

[Allegra]

Just so you know, it is a legitimate procedure for a OB to check a woman’s dialation by inserting his fingers and pushing against her cervix. It is quite painful, especially when the woman is in labor. It is unlikely that the doctor broke her water that way, unless you saw him use an instrument. I had to have my sack broken when I had my daughter and all I felt was the same old tool they always use when you are getting an exam. I didn’t feel it at all when they inserted the hook and broke the sack. I just felt the fluid coming out.

 

[dixieagle]

I fully agree with C-sections when the alternative is the death of the baby.

The verse in Genesis already quoted surely indicates that dulling or removing the pain of childbearing (not just childbirth - I’d include period pains, vulvodynia, endometriosis) is immoral, as it is God’s plan that these things are painful for us.

I saw your first post and thought you couldn’t possibly be serious, but evidently you are.

The Church teaches nothing of the sort. If relieving of pain, whether from childbirth or anything else, were “immoral” as you attest, then don’t you think the Church would have told us? Find a single Church teaching or document that supports your view.

We are people of the Good News of the New Testament, not subject to Old Testament laws, much less those made up by people putting their own spin on things.

That all said, I think that there are far too many c-sections done for convenience (“too posh to push”) is one term used to describe this practice. C-sections can be life-saving, for both mother and baby, but should not be the default setting for deliveries.

 

[rcwitness]

Just so you know, it is a legitimate procedure for a OB to check a woman’s dialation by inserting his fingers and pushing against her cervix. It is quite painful, especially when the woman is in labor. It is unlikely that the doctor broke her water that way, unless you saw him use an instrument. I had to have my sack broken when I had my daughter and all I felt was the same old tool they always use when you are getting an exam. I didn’t feel it at all when they inserted the hook and broke the sack. I just felt the fluid coming out.

Hello!!! She was not in labor or at full term. It was the first visit with this man. It was his way of inducing the labor. He took matters into his own hands because it was convenient for him. Then it was no wonder why she wasnt dialating like she should have been. Then after only 6 hours from her water breaking (which was just a coincidence that it was under 30 min from putting his filthy finger on my wife?) he was threatening her that the baby would be born blind if he did not perform a c-section.

Would you allow this man to do this to you at 39 wks, without your permission?

 

[rcwitness]

The Church teaches nothing of the sort. If relieving of pain, whether from childbirth or anything else, were “immoral” as you attest, then don’t you think the Church would have told us? Find a single Church teaching or document that supports your view.

pain medicine is not immoral to take. But sometimes its not very helpfull. My sister was so drugged up from anesthesia that she doesnt even remember her birth. She was wasted.

Just because the Church doesnt have a specific Teaching about something, does not mean its good to do.

That all said, I think that there are far too many c-sections done for convenience (“too posh to push”) is one term used to describe this practice. C-sections can be life-saving, for both mother and baby, but should not be the default setting for deliveries.

 

[rcwitness]

OP, please stop thinking about playing Russian roulette with the lives of your wife and unborn son, because your theologically-incorrect pastor gave some personal opinion masquerading as a “homily” (and which should be reported to the bishop as such), and you’ve decided to take him literally.

We can debate this until we’re blue in the face. That will serve no rational purpose.

So I will end with this:

Crazy is crazy.

I’m moving on.

I respect my pastors theology very much. Its based on respect and trust in God. Yours is based on fear and human control.

 

[Allegra]

Hello!!! She was not in labor or at full term. It was the first visit with this man. It was his way of inducing the labor. He took matters into his own hands because it was convenient for him. Then it was no wonder why she wasnt dialating like she should have been. Then after only 6 hours from her water breaking (which was just a coincidence that it was under 30 min from putting his filthy finger on my wife?) he was threatening her that the baby would be born blind if he did not perform a c-section.

Would you allow this man to do this to you at 39 wks, without your permission?

Lots of women go into labor at 39 weeks. I’m only telling you that it is a normal part of an exam at 39 weeks for a doctor to check the cervix for dialation. Yes. I allowed my doctor to check my cervix for dialation at 39 weeks and, in fact, at 38 weeks. It is a normal thing for a doctor to do. They also checked me twice at the hospital when I was in labor and he used gloves.

 

[rcwitness]

Lots of women go into labor at 39 weeks. I’m only telling you that it is a normal part of an exam at 39 weeks for a doctor to check the cervix for dialation. Yes. I allowed my doctor to check my cervix for dialation at 39 weeks and, in fact, at 38 weeks. It is a normal thing for a doctor to do. They also checked me twice at the hospital when I was in labor and he used gloves.

I do understand this and the check for dialating would not have been a problem. Do you honestly believe that it was coincidence that he did this and half hour later her water broke? She did not have any contractions or colic or anyother labor symptom. Most women dont experience water breaking until they are into labor. She was not dialating for up to 6 hrs after her water broke, because he went farther into her with his hand than just a cervix check.

But honestly, Im not sure I want to continue this kind of personal details when Im getting alot of negative criticism. The issue is about unnecessary c-sections and people are desperately trying to alter this point to focuss on other things. Trust me… Brazil is not the place you want to have a normal birth. The only place that will do it for you is the public hospitols, and you dont want to get into the horror stories about those!

I do appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut. I honestly want opinions on the topic.

 

[mommamaree]

What was done to your wife was horrible. Your anger is completely justified. In fact, I don’t even know you, and I am angry for you and your wife’s sake. I have had a doctor do what that doctor did, and stick his fingers up too far and purposefully rip my bag of waters, and say “oh whoops, looks like your water broke!” It was incredibly painful and he later did not assist me with delivering the baby, and I was injured. And that all happened when I was already IN labor. I cannot imagine how traumatic it was for your wife to “be induced” in such a brute fashion. I have had a legitimate amniotomy, too, with my second birth, and it was painless and peaceful and soothing, to feel the rush of waters relieving pain and helping me finish transition. So there is a HUGE difference between careful and necessary help, and retaliatory behavior from a belligerent doctor.

I want to say this as a woman who has never been induced and never had any form of pain relief in my four childbirth experiences so far. Please be careful, in your efforts to protect your wife from further harm, coercion, and mistreatment by medical professionals, NOT to allow yourself to become dogmatically opposed to certain kinds of intervention and those perspectives/preferences that differ from your own. You do not know how your wife will handle labor and delivery. No woman ever REALLY knows how she will handle it, even moms with lots of experience birthing babies.

Regarding the debate over epidurals and other medicinal pain relievers: it is true that pain during childbirth is a consequence of the Fall; however, so is sickness and death. The Church has taught that the use of medicine and doctor’s care is good, and that humans caring for each other, trying to relieve each other’s pain and suffering, and prolonging and saving lives, and improving the quality of life is all GOOD. We are permitted to use pain relievers for something as minor as a headache (we don’t have to, but we may if we do choose) so the use of epidurals and other pain relievers in childbirth is certainly acceptable. It is not spiritually unhealthy to accept the gift of pain relief.
Some people choose stoicism for themselves, and that is fine. But no one can make that choice for another person. And we cannot presume to judge the moral value of another’s medical decisions, when the medical options are all morally neutral.
Regarding your original question: the way that the Church Herself determines the moral nature of an action is not the way you are determining here. She looks at the intention, the object, and the means. C-sections are not an immoral means of delivering a baby. HOWEVER, and this is a BIG however, the intentions and the object are extremely important to consider. Is the object a healthy mother and child, or is it that the doctor has things go according to his preference? Is the intention to do what is medically necessary, or something else more selfish or vain (on the part of the doctor or a patient or her husband)? So THESE are the aspects for you to focus on when forming your conscience on this matter. Not vilifying the medical procedures, which are morally neutral, but examining the object and intentions behind it all.
Continued in next post…

 

[Stillsosola]

You’re not from Brazil are you?

In mexico city too every woman even first timers are scheduled automatically for c sections only those who go in labor before deliver naturally which out of my husbands 20 aunts and 30 female cousins on both sides of his family no one has had a natural delivery it started in the late sevenites here as a norm and is spreading to the rest of the country

But to answer OP no its not immoral some countires mandate csextions some women prefer it some doctors prefer it its easier on them supposedly i personally would only have one if it was life or death but im a natural birthing kind of gal basically its your body your birth experience your choice if you want an elective c section go ahead.

 

[mommamaree]

Your wife and you are facing a difficult challenge, attempting to deliver naturally in Brazil. This was true even of your wife’s first delivery. And you now have added risks. I am thankful that you have a better support system and an understanding doctor who is willing to help you if things go sideways. As you and your wife prepare for the big day, please consider, instead of railing against different perspectives (which is understandable is a situation where a person has been victimized and seeks to take back their power and their rights), seek the intercession of the saints, and build up a network of people around the world who will pray for your wife and child. I hope you have heard of St. Gerard Majella, the patron saint of expectant mothers and childbirth. If not, let me know and I will post a link to a devotional chaplet that you can use to seek his intercession. Also St. Anne, the mother of the Blessed Virgin Mary, is the patron saint of mothers, and St. Elizabeth, Mary’s cousin, is a patron saint of expectant mothers. These holy saints in heaven will urgently petition our Lord Jesus for your wife and child. Please consider using your energy to storm heaven with prayers lifting up your little family.
Very few people who are not from Brazil are going to be able to believe the situation there could possibly be as bad as you describe. I only know because of people I have known who informed me, being in the know themselves. So I think you will encounter a lot of incredulity. People in the US are incredulous when they are informed about maternity care here in the States just a few decades ago, because it also sounds so incredibly barbaric and paternalistic. It used to be very very bad here, too.
So again, I return to my plea to you: save your energy for your little family, for your wife and unborn baby, for preparing and praying. I will certainly pray for your family and add you all to my list of intentions when I am offering up my sufferings in labor and delivery. Maybe, you might be willing to pray for me some, too? My last delivery was kinda scary, and I am nervous that I might panic during labor.
But please, let go of any kind of thinking that attempts to justify your wife’s path forward by making objections about help women gratefully receive in order to bear our sufferings more gracefully. That is truly spiritually unhealthy, because it is but a house built on sands of shifting opinion and changing circumstances. Ground your faith upon the rock of the Church’s teachings, which eschews idle speculation and leans heavily upon charity in matters of prudential and circumstantial choices.

God bless you and your family, rcwitness.

 

[sscott]

Yes, it is immoral and it is also malpractice to do a c-section for no good reason. In the US one third of all babies are born by c-section. Many of these are coerced because the doctor is in a hurry. Many are scheduled ahead for the “convenience” of the mother or doctor. (I don’t know where another poster got the idea it is not done for convenience in the US because it is.) It is a travesty that what should be a natural event has been taken over by surgeons for their convenience and monetary enrichment.
Every minute in the womb counts. Unless there is an over-riding reason, a baby should stay in the womb till he is ready to leave. Babies born by c-section miss out on the compression of the lungs during birth and they also miss getting the lacto-bacilli from their mother’s birth canal. This has a continuing affect on their bodies. Bacteria are part of our what keeps us healthy.
Yes, it is immoral for doctors to do something that is harmful to the baby unless there is some pressing medical reason to get the baby out fast.
My sister had two children at home with the aid of a midwife. All went well and she had two healthy babies. This was in spite of her having gestational diabetes. Good luck. Prayers certainly can’t hurt.

 

[Book_Worm]

I respect my pastors theology very much. Its based on respect and trust in God. Yours is based on fear and human control.

Do you really believe that if it were sinful for a woman to relieve the pain of childbirth through the use of epidurals or C-sections, Holy Mother Church would not make this part of her teachings? YOU seem to be the one who is basing his beliefs on human control, the theory of one man, rather than relying on the wisdom of the Church.

 

[pnewton]

This is simple. There is no Church teaching on the morality of a C-section. In absence of a moral prohibition by the Church, then the law of Christian freedom applies and people can act in accordance to either their informed conscience or just do what they want.

 

[dixieagle]

pain medicine is not immoral to take. But sometimes its not very helpfull. My sister was so drugged up from anesthesia that she doesnt even remember her birth. She was wasted.

Just because the Church doesnt have a specific Teaching about something, does not mean its good to do.

Medication for pain management is morally neutral. Whether it is “good to do” or not has nothing whatever to do with morality, and everything to do with whether it works and is safe. The Church expects us to use common sense and sound judgment; we cannot possibly expect the Church to have made pronouncements on every little thing.

 

[Xantippe]

I am willing to relent some on my statements about epidural use. I really dont think it is that good of an approach to birth, honestly. But its not what I see as a big problem.

**I’ve had epidurals three times for three vaginal deliveries (I’ve been pregnant 4 times, 3 live births, one late miscarriage). Here is my experience:

1. I planned to try for natural childbirth, believing vaguely that it was healthier or better (I had spent a lot of time around natural childbirth fans, and had never heard the case for modern obstetrics). I got very annoyed with finding myself tied down with all sorts of “interventions” (IV, monitor, etc.). It was very annoying to take all of that stuff into the restroom every hour or so. Eventually (somewhere about halfway through) I was starting to be in a fair amount of pain and I wasn’t close to being able to deliver and I asked for an epidural. My pain disappeared and I didn’t have to walk to the bathroom, I could just have a catheter. I had a beautiful nap, woke up rested, and pushed out my baby. That took 13 hours.**

**2. At this point, I realized that the epidural was fantastic, but I still believed it was somehow better for the baby to go natural, but I knew I wasn’t going to be able to manage the pain, so I decided on an epidural, feeling a little guilty about it. When the day arrived, it turned out to be a very fast, very painful labor and there was a lot of difficulty getting the epidural. There were about half a dozen tries to insert the epidural (not sure), all while I felt that I was being ripped apart by contractions. Part of the reason it took so long was that I was in so much pain that I couldn’t be still, but was thrashing around uncontrollably. The epidural only started working just before it was time to push, which was inconvenient. I’m still glad I got the epidural, though. The whole labor took 4 hours total. I talked to an OB about that later and complained that it almost wasn’t worth it to get the epidural that time because the insertion was terrible and I got almost no pain relief. She said that at least I had it for my repairs, which made a LOT of sense. If you’ve never been around a vaginal delivery, they spend a LOT of time stitching up the damage afterward.

1. There was a long break between my 2nd and my 3rd (7 years). During this very complicated pregnancy, I spent a lot of time reading childbirth blogs (theskepticalob.com and theadequatemother.wordpress.com–the latter is an anesthesiologist, as well as others). I discovered a lot of things at that point. Epidurals are harmless to babies and don’t slow labor very much, for instance. Here’s are some posts from the anesthesiologist blogger on epidurals:

theadequatemother.wordpress.com/category/epidurals/page/2/**

I also learned why my first OB had done all the stuff that had annoyed me. I still think that she should have talked and explained more, but I now understand that everything she did was medically impeccable (the IV with fluids and antibiotics for the Group B strep I was carrying, the monitor, the pitocin, etc.).

For my 3rd, I had an induction at 39 weeks. I got an epidural as soon as I started to feel very uncomfortable and when I was at the point where I wanted pain relief more than mobility. I had a nice chat with the anesthesiologist beforehand and the epidural went in fine. It was great. From my arrival to the hospital room to the delivery of a 9-pound baby girl was no more than 9 hours.

Honestly, if I thought the pain was always going to be as bad as it was with my #2 kid with the delayed epidural, I don’t think I would have been willing to have more children (at least until I could forget about it). It is not infrequently the case that a bad childbirth experience will make women unwilling to have more. Good anesthesia can take the fear out of childbirth, can make it tolerable rather than non-stop torture. And as far as modern medicine removing a woman from the childbirth experience–I have to say that with my second (where I only had a last minute epidural), almost the only memories I have are of pain. Pain was the only thing I was experiencing up until I got my epidural. I have no idea what else was happening in the room. In contrast, when I’ve had epidurals, I’ve been calm, happy, rational and involved in the process–it’s quite a contrast.

A pregnant woman is not a patient. There is nothing wrong with her and really does not need a doctor or hospitol. But there can be any number of complications which call for a doctor and in some cases a c-section. The percentage of legitimate c-sections should be between 10 and 15 percent of births.

**Who says? Countries with 10% rates of c-section are usually very undeveloped and have terrible maternal and newborn outcomes.

Also, if you do a home birth, you’ll have one nurse and a doula, despite the fact that you’ll have two patients (your wife and the baby). That means that if both need emergency medical care, you will have only one trained healthcare provider to deal with two human beings in trouble. Meanwhile, in the hospital, they have easily a dozen people available to deal instantly with emergencies.

Here’s a blog post entitled “The Hospital is Just Minutes Away”:

10centimeters.com/friday-fallacies-the-hospital-is-just-minutes-away/**

My wife is the one who will deliver her baby. I will catch the baby and cut the cord. We will help and support in any way we can. The invironment, people present, techniques, and tools used will all help give her a good experience and birth. Please pray for us. We are very willing to do what may be necessary if problems arise that are out of our control.

Best wishes!

 

[Xantippe]

Again, there’s approximately a 1 in 200 risk of uterine rupture for VBAC. If you hope for a large family and you have a friendly well-staffed hospital to do a VBAC at, it’s not a crazy risk to take, but out of hospital, it could end very badly for mother and child. Even in the hospital, a uterine rupture can be a terrible situation, but out of hospital, it’s unthinkable.

Just for your convenience, here’s a list of symptoms of uterine rupture:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uterine_rupture

 

[PrincessRenae]

Yes, it is immoral and it is also malpractice to do a c-section for no good reason. In the US one third of all babies are born by c-section. Many of these are coerced because the doctor is in a hurry. Many are scheduled ahead for the “convenience” of the mother or doctor. (I don’t know where another poster got the idea it is not done for convenience in the US because it is.) It is a travesty that what should be a natural event has been taken over by surgeons for their convenience and monetary enrichment.
Every minute in the womb counts. Unless there is an over-riding reason, a baby should stay in the womb till he is ready to leave. Babies born by c-section miss out on the compression of the lungs during birth and they also miss getting the lacto-bacilli from their mother’s birth canal. This has a continuing affect on their bodies. Bacteria are part of our what keeps us healthy.
Yes, it is immoral for doctors to do something that is harmful to the baby unless there is some pressing medical reason to get the baby out fast.
My sister had two children at home with the aid of a midwife. All went well and she had two healthy babies. This was in spite of her having gestational diabetes. Good luck. Prayers certainly can’t hurt.

This is complete non-medical bunk.

 

[rcwitness]

Yes, it is immoral and it is also malpractice to do a c-section for no good reason. In the US one third of all babies are born by c-section. Many of these are coerced because the doctor is in a hurry. Many are scheduled ahead for the “convenience” of the mother or doctor. (I don’t know where another poster got the idea it is not done for convenience in the US because it is.) It is a travesty that what should be a natural event has been taken over by surgeons for their convenience and monetary enrichment.
Every minute in the womb counts. Unless there is an over-riding reason, a baby should stay in the womb till he is ready to leave. Babies born by c-section miss out on the compression of the lungs during birth and they also miss getting the lacto-bacilli from their mother’s birth canal. This has a continuing affect on their bodies. Bacteria are part of our what keeps us healthy.
Yes, it is immoral for doctors to do something that is harmful to the baby unless there is some pressing medical reason to get the baby out fast.
My sister had two children at home with the aid of a midwife. All went well and she had two healthy babies. This was in spite of her having gestational diabetes. Good luck. Prayers certainly can’t hurt.

This is complete non-medical bunk.

Please provide medical evidence refuting backing your rude comment. This can all be supported by the World Health Organization.

 

[Cat]

Does anyone have any information WHY C-sections are pushed in Brazil?

I think we need to know the reason why C-sections are done at such a high rate in Brazil. What’s going on there? C-sections are major abdominal surgery, and no doctor in their right mind is going to do C-sections if they have other alternatives to keep mother and baby safe.

In the U.S., our society is “sue-crazy” and doctors often feel obligated to use a C-section to avoid a lawsuit. The reasons for lawsuits are many and varied, and lawyers can turn any baby issues or problems into lawsuits. “OF course, this happened to your baby because the doctor allowed you to labor and give birth vaginally. If the doctor had acted quickly and done a C-section, your child would be perfectly normal.”

Yeah, right. Lawyers can be snakes.

But what’s the reason in Brazil? Is it also because of lawsuits?

Is there a health reason (e.g., do women who give birth vaginally have some kind of tradition that is dangerous for them or the baby?).

Is there a possibility that many Brazilian women have some kind of inherited physical trait or weakness that often results in fetal demise from vaginal births, so the doctors are trying to save lives by doing more C-sections? (I’m just speculating here. It’s a possibility.)

Are hospitals in Brazil safe for women to labor and give birth, or are they unsafe in some way? Are women in labor exploited in some way; e.g., by photographers who use the labor and birth footage for some unsavory reason? (We can’t imagine this happening the U.S. because of HIPAA and other hospital rules and regulations.)

Is it for a culture of beauty? (Although I agree with a poster above who mentioned the unsightly C-section scar; even a bikini cut scar is pretty ugly.)

Is there something that the Brazil government requires of doctors that makes C-sections a better option for them than vaginal births? E.g. do they reimburse a much higher fee for C-sections?

Are there enough doctors in Brazil? Are there so few doctors that they feel obligated to do C-sections because they have such a heavy patient load and can’t spend the time at a vaginal delivery? (although most of the labor, a nurse is present, not a doctor, at least in the U.S.)?

I’ve heard that Brazil has the most booming economy of any of the countries in the world, and that it is the wealthiest country in the world. How does this influence a doctor’s choice to do C-sections?

So what is the reason for the increased rate of C-sections in Brazil? The REAL reason, please.