Uneccesary C-section immoral?

[Xantippe]

rcwitness,

I just realized that you were very concerned about painful cervical checks done on your wife.

Bear in mind that unless your wife is very, very, very lucky, a vaginal labor and delivery will be roughly 1,000X (if not more) more painful than a bad cervical check.

And I’m not kidding about the 1,000X.

 

[Xantippe]

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

If vaginal bacteria is so crucial, it’s quite possible to rub a c-section baby all over with vaginal fluids. Mom has lots of them.

I’m not recommending this (in fact, I think it’s a terrible idea), but it’s an obvious solution.

By the way, there’s developing data that inductions (as opposed to watchful waiting) reduce the chance of c-section. That suggests that the “every minute in the womb” idea is false.

health.usnews.com/health-news/articles/2014/04/28/induced-labor-may-lower-risk-for-c-section-study-finds

By the way, I think I know why your doctor said that they were afraid your baby would be blind if you did a vaginal delivery. Herpes transmitted from mother to child during vaginal birth can cause blindness, so the mother having herpes is a reason for doctors to favor c-section.

nytimes.com/health/guides/disease/herpes-simplex/possible-complications.html

So, while mentioning a risk of blindness may not have been a reasonable thing for your doctor to say in your particular case, your doctor wasn’t just making stuff up.

 

[Xantippe]

Cat,

I believe that Latin American countries generally have high c-section rates for social reasons–I was looking the one up for Mexico recently, and it was something like 50%.

minnpost.com/christian-science-monitor/2013/04/birth-old-fashioned-way-its-way-out-mexico

Maybe the presence of household help and/or helpful relatives makes the c-section more attractive in Latin America?

Here in the US, I think one of the biggest reasons women fear c-sections is that they fear they’ll come home with a baby and struggle with the baby and with housework alone with no help during the day–perhaps even with a toddler at home to make it really hard.

It’s hard to think of any other major procedure where there are such high expectations for the patient being able to bounce back and go about her normal business almost immediately. I’ve heard and read harrowing stories of c-section moms finding it impossible to care for babies in the hospital but not having adequate nurse help or a night nursery, mom trying to vacuum way to soon right after coming home, or one of my aunties getting dragged off to go car camping by her husband with two little step-kids, a newborn, and a fresh c-section scar.

 

[on_the_hill]

I agree with you overall, but that is not the case any more. There are many doctors who are okay with a vaginal birth after a C-section, depending on the circumstances. I was very surprised to hear this as I had always thought that one c-section required all additional births to be c-sections as well, but apparently it depends on whether the cuts were horizontal or vertical and other aspects of the original surgery.

In my wife’s case, the doctor was willing to let her attempt VBAC. However, for the second and third babies, she never went into labor.

I mean, her body never went into labor, not that the docs did the c-section before she was able to. They did the c-sections when, at 42 weeks, she was showing no signs of labor.

 

[Sophie_Lawrence]

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.

Hello. I’m posting using my phone so its a little slow and I cannot post links. But Google, “'C-section rates Brazil”. I did and came across some interesting recent articles. I believe Princeton university did a study as well. Some hospitals in Brazil have a 99% c section rate.

 

[Lorelei12]

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.

OP, I think this is a very good response to your question. It does appear, from my limited knowledge of Brazilian culture, that this is a very real problem. From my understanding (I believe I remember seeing a documentary at one time, but I could be remembering incorrectly) C-sections are sort of a status symbol. Vaginal births are painful and messy, and “for the poor”, and doctors do routinely push C-sections, either due to convenience or because it is just common hospital practice to do so. In my opinion, this is unconscionable- to push a major surgery on a woman who has a normal pregnancy and no medical reason for such intervention. So I agree with you there, for sure.

It seems that you are well aware that there are many good reasons why a section would be the best choice in a given situation, and are upset at your wife’s previous experience. I would be too. However, I have to say that I find your attitude toward pain management simply appalling. Each woman and each birth experience is different, and I do hope that your wife is able to labor the way she wants (although I will echo the concerns of previous posters- I would never attempt a home VBAC) but I also hope that if she ends up rejecting pain management, it is not out of some misguided notion that God wants laboring women to suffer; that it is “built in”. Pain experience is subjective, and can only be evaluated by the person experiencing it. Women have varying levels of pain tolerance, and can even have neurological conditions which affect their experience of pain. Treating that pain, or not treating it, is a very personal decision, not to be made by anyone other than the woman herself according to whatever safe options her doctor makes available to her. If your wife is committed to that and can handle it, that’s perfectly fine, but please, there is no need to judge other women for making use of epidurals or other options, or assert something that the Church does not teach.

 

[PrincessRenae]

OP, you clearly came on here having just watched “the business of being born” or some other thing full of **** and also made by Riki Lake. You even disputed the OBSTETRICIAN, I.e. ACTUAL MEDICAL DOCTOR who tried to tell you otherwise, and you’re trying to justify all this by finding some sort of sinfulness where there is none. It would be wise of you to stop listening to pseudoscience from these non-medical “birth advocates” and find some actual science from a reputable source, unless you are just gonna ignore it anyway and believe whatever you want. The WHO nor any other health organization of credibility sides with you on this.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

This article talks about this subject Why Most Brazilian Women Get C-Sections

 

[heidi_storage]

May God protect your wife and baby.

 

[phillylawyer]

The measure of surgically cutting out a baby from the womb rejects a fundamental aspect of birth. Outside the real avoidence of harm to mother or child

Do you think Mary would have chosen a c-section?

If it was safe and available at the time and the doctor recommended it, yes.

 

[thewanderer]

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

The part that stands out to me as being clearly false is this claim

Every minute in the womb counts.

Besides the point already brought up that now that people are comparing people who at a set point in time choose either induction or a “wait and see” approach instead of comparing all those who end up with an induction to those who followed the “wait and see” approach and succesfully went into labour on their own, we are now seeing no increase in risk of c-section from any form of induction and a decreased risk of c-section with certain types of induction. The risk of stillbirth increases the longer the child stays in the womb. This means there will necessarily come a point when the risk of stillbirth gets high enough to overbalance any good effects that come from remaining in the womb, and so, that it is better for the baby to induce (especially seeing as better formulated studies are no indicating no increase in risk of c-section no matter what form of induction is used) than to let the baby risk a stillbirth under the misguided impression that “every minute in the womb counts”.

 

[Xantippe]

One reason for high c-section rates in some parts of the world is that with c-section, pain relief is almost guaranteed, whereas with vaginal birth in those areas, pain relief may not be reliably available.

Hence, if one wants to increase the number of vaginal births in countries with very high c-section rates (40% and above), one good way to do that would be to have a campaign to improve access to good anesthesia for vaginal births. That also may be the answer to encouraging childbirth in some countries with tiny birthrates–women may simply be terrified (and with good reason) by the prospect of uncontrollable multiday agony.

 

[Allegra]

One reason for high c-section rates in some parts of the world is that with c-section, pain relief is almost guaranteed, whereas with vaginal birth in those areas, pain relief may not be reliably available.

Hence, if one wants to increase the number of vaginal births in countries with very high c-section rates (40% and above), one good way to do that would be to have a campaign to improve access to good anesthesia for vaginal births. That also may be the answer to encouraging childbirth in some countries with tiny birthrates–women may simply be terrified (and with good reason) by the prospect of uncontrollable multiday agony.

I didn’t even think of that. My mother has told me that she was relieved in a way that she had to have a C-section with me because her insurance at the time didn’t cover an epidural and she couldn’t have afforded one. That would be a really strong non-medical incentive for a woman to get a C-section.

 

[rcwitness]

rcwitness,

I just realized that you were very concerned about painful cervical checks done on your wife.

Bear in mind that unless your wife is very, very, very lucky, a vaginal labor and delivery will be roughly 1,000X (if not more) more painful than a bad cervical check.

And I’m not kidding about the 1,000X.

My wife was not complaining about the “pain”, but the arrogant doctor who successfully induced her water to break, while she was not actually going into labor. Then coerced her into an unwanted c-section.

Your attempt at putting fear into a labor on the sole premice of pain in order to justify a c-section is immoral, and the very thing that I find ugly and disrespectfull to a sacred birth.

Just because an unnecessary c-section is immoral, does not mean im assigning sin to anyone in particular. Their could be many different reasons for woman thinking they need one, but really dont. It could be the doctors to blame, or the mother, or both, or maybe both are invincibly ignorant. Its not my desire to tell someone what they are sinning, but that I believe unnecessary c-sections are immoral. Society, the States included, is going towards more unnecessary c-sections. Is it healthy??? NOT according to the World Health Organization.

 

[PolarGuy]

Nothing like a Brazilian man i) telling women how to give birth; and ii) saying what direction medicine in the USA is going.

Just sayin…

 

[Allegra]

Your attempt at putting fear into a labor on the sole premice of pain in order to justify a c-section is immoral, and the very thing that I find ugly and disrespectfull to a sacred birth.

There are a few options for pain relief that fall short of abdominal surgery. I think the poster was suggesting one of those.

 

[rcwitness]

Nothing like a Brazilian man i) telling women how to give birth; and ii) saying what direction medicine in the USA is going.

Just sayin…

Im not a Brazilian man…

What difference would that make anyway. right now, c-section rates in the States has been rising and is now at 35%. The World Health Organization has shown that this number should be between 10 and 15%. This is based on the pecent of births which encounter problems with risks that outweigh the risk of a major surgery.

I really wish you would provide some medical evidence to support your statements.

 

[PrincessRenae]

Nothing like a Brazilian man i) telling women how to give birth; and ii) saying what direction medicine in the USA is going.

Just sayin…

 

[rcwitness]

There are a few options for pain relief that fall short of abdominal surgery. I think the poster was suggesting one of those.

Ive asked people to discuss unnecesary c-sections and their opinion on the morality of them. Why should I assume someone is talking about something different, when they dont specify.

 

[PolarGuy]

It’s really not up to me (or others!) to defend our posts with medical data; you’re the one positing statements, so I think it’s up to you to defend yours.

Look, I wrote yesterday that “crazy is crazy” and I meant it. I’m hanging around only the hopes that a) I can prevent the spread of false theology; and that b) maybe something I say reduces the risk to your wife and baby, namely, the risk inherent in a medically-unsupported home VBAC.

I note that you came here essentially asking for opinions. You repeated that request later. Yet with your responses and some of your :thumbsup:s, it looks like you don’t really want our opinions, so much as you want us to accept yours. If so…I’d say the onus is on you to convince us, and what boils down to “we heard a homily we agreed with” appears uncompelling “evidence” to others.