Panel looks into C-section pros, cons

[TexasStooge]

By JANET ST. JAMES / WFAA ABC 8

While Cesarean sections by choice have become increasingly popular and have skyrocketed 40 percent in the last decade, the National Institutes of Health issued a warning to women who want several children Wednesday.

More than 29 percent of all babies are born by C-section, which is an all-time high.

Months before baby Garrett was born, Michelle de Klerk knew what his birthday would be because she chose it herself.

"[It] was going to be in numerical sequence with my other two," she said. "My first one has a 26th of April birthday, my second is a 27th of July and this one would've been the 28th."

De Klerk is just one among the growing number of busy women who chose to have a C-section.

The latest figures show three in every 10 babies are now delivered surgically. Ten percent of the C-sections aren't medically necessary.

"Some women are scared of labor," said Dr. Jane Nokleberg, a Presbyterian Hospital obstetrician-gynecologist. "Others, it's for convenience and timing."

Dr. Nokleberg said urinary incontinence, a common side effect of traditional birth, is another big reason why some woman would rather have surgery.

But a panel with the National Institutes of Health said women who want more than two children should avoid elective C-sections because risks do increase with each one.

Dr. Nokleberg said she agrees with the NIH that the 'C' in C-sections should not stand for convenience, but should be considered case by case.

"That's a patient choice between her and her physician," she said.

De Klerk's preconceived plans for birth didn't exactly go as scheduled. Complications resulted in a C-section delivery two days before planned.

But despite the surprise, baby Garrett was born safely.

[O Town]

I totally disagree with being able to choose. If it is necessary and child or mother is in immediate danger, then by all means it should be done. It is like messing with mother nature and changing fate, not to mention you are going under the knife. I know my doctor did not allow a choice. I think all doctors should be the same way.

[HurryKane]

I totally disagree with being able to choose. If it is necessary and child or mother is in immediate danger, then by all means it should be done. It is like messing with mother nature and changing fate, not to mention you are going under the knife. I know my doctor did not allow a choice. I think all doctors should be the same way.

I disagree, and think the mother should be able to choose based on advice from her doctor. It really is between the patient and the doctor, and none of the rest of us.

[O Town]

I totally disagree with being able to choose. If it is necessary and child or mother is in immediate danger, then by all means it should be done. It is like messing with mother nature and changing fate, not to mention you are going under the knife. I know my doctor did not allow a choice. I think all doctors should be the same way.

I disagree, and think the mother should be able to choose based on advice from her doctor. It really is between the patient and the doctor, and none of the rest of us.

Your right it is between the doctor and patient, and none of the rest of us. I just disagree with it. If you are scared of labor don't get pregnant. Health issues are a whole different ball game. But to do it to pick a convient date, or because your scared it just crazy IMO.

[pojo]

you can't guarantee the date either... it is when the BABY is ready, not the mother.
If the baby or the mother is in immediate danger than yes a C-section would be the best option... otherwise let nature run it's course

[gtalum]

But the point is that people should have the choice to do what they want. Require doctors to advise their patients of all of the risks, and then let doctors and patients make teh choices. It's none of anyone else's business.

[Yankeegirl]

I had my first baby c section because I developed Toxemia (sp?) and it could have been potentially dangerous. My second child I was given the option to have another c section or natural... I picked another c section because my first was pretty easy... My thrid (and last) child I had to have another c section because they said that I have already had 2 and that there is too much scar tissue and its too dangerous to have natural.. My c sections and all pretty much been a piece of cake... But no more kids for me... Ill let my kids have the kids later on....

[CajunMama]

C-sections should be for emergency deliveries only not for the convenience of the mother or doctor. I'm appalled at the number of doctors that schedule sections for mothers who may be a week past their due date. I had an emergency section with my first child who was breech but chose a regular delivery for my second. My second child was a scheduled inducement as my doctor wanted to be with me during my labor in case something happened that would require immediate surgery. It was the best decision i ever made.As Pojo said, "let nature run it's course".

[HurricaneBill]

My mom had a c-section for my older brother because he went 3 weeks past the due date and was beginning to lose weight. I guess he got too comfortable or something.

[HurryKane]

C-sections should be for emergency deliveries only not for the convenience of the mother or doctor. I'm appalled at the number of doctors that schedule sections for mothers who may be a week past their due date. I had an emergency section with my first child who was breech but chose a regular delivery for my second. My second child was a scheduled inducement as my doctor wanted to be with me during my labor in case something happened that would require immediate surgery. It was the best decision i ever made.As Pojo said, "let nature run it's course".

But what is it to you if someone you've never met and never will has a C-section for reasons other than emergency and the baby is fine and healthy? It's not like the world is going to fall apart if a woman has a C-section for whatever reason--and hers and the doctor's are the only reasons that matter.

[O Town]

It actually it is not as healthy for baby to come out from c section. They sometimes have trouble clearing the liquid from thier lungs. Usually it is squeezed out when they come out the birth canal, and that does not happen through c section. And thus have to be sent to the NICU to help breathing along, and mother and child get less chance to bond. Really I could care less if they choose to do it, but I think what we are saying is we just don't agree with it. But I DO agree with the fact that it should be their choice, but I think they should be more informed before jumping on the c section banwagon.

While most C-sections are performed without a hitch, the surgical procedure isn't entirely without risk to the mother. Maternal complications of Cesarean delivery include a higher risk of infection, excessive blood loss, a prolonged recovery time, and the possibility of having an adverse reaction to anesthesia.

Some experts believe that after undergoing the surgery, new mothers are less able to bond with and care for their newborns. Even worse, C-sections are associated with a significantly higher risk of maternal death than natural deliveries.

In some cases, birth by Cesarean section may pose problems for infants, as well. Recent research suggests that babies delivered by C-section are more likely to develop food allergies, and they may have a greater chance of developing asthma and other respiratory problems in infancy and childhood.

In spite of the potential risks, many obstetricians believe the demand for Cesarean sections will continue to rise in the U.S. and in other countries. "There's an ethical issue here," said Golditch. "Women should have the right to choose."

http://www.arcamax.com/cgi-bin/news/sto ... 228/191853

[CajunMama]

C-sections should be for emergency deliveries only not for the convenience of the mother or doctor. I'm appalled at the number of doctors that schedule sections for mothers who may be a week past their due date. I had an emergency section with my first child who was breech but chose a regular delivery for my second. My second child was a scheduled inducement as my doctor wanted to be with me during my labor in case something happened that would require immediate surgery. It was the best decision i ever made.As Pojo said, "let nature run it's course".

But what is it to you if someone you've never met and never will has a C-section for reasons other than emergency and the baby is fine and healthy? It's not like the world is going to fall apart if a woman has a C-section for whatever reason--and hers and the doctor's are the only reasons that matter.

I'm concerned for the health of the baby. Besides it's not nice to fool mother nature

[CentralFlGal]

"Too scared of labor." "Busy moms."

Generally speaking on the parenting trends I see around me in this day and age, I fret to see the subsequent parenting methods used for these children born of convenience.

C sections are medically necessary in many cases, but I do not believe they should be performed for aesthetic reasons alone.

My first baby - natural/no drugs & 24 hours labor.
My second baby - Demoral drip (she was 10 pounds) and 12 hours labor.

I could launch into my patriarchial society conspriacy theories on muting/changing anything that makes us women uniquely female, but I won't
Besides, don't the docs get to charge more money for a C section as compared to vaginal delivery?