forums
C-sections and preemies
Anyone see this study linking C-sections and preterm births?
I had a C-section, but my daughter was 11 days late. After 27 hours of back labor, I finally consented to a C-section (and it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be).
But I've got a couple of friends who have scheduled C-sections a couple of weeks before their actual due date. Not for health reasons. Just because they didn't want to go through labor or it didn't fit into their maternity leave plans. Their babies turned out fine, but it seems to me kind of a risky thing to do.


Comments
I had c-sections with both of my boys.
The first was because James was sideways. He was three days late and I was scheduled to be induced. I never dilated. One nurse said she thought he could have stayed in for another month.
The second was my choice. I seriously considered having Jackson the old-fashioned way but instead opted for a repeat simply because I knew what to expect.
With the repeat I had the choice of two dates, the earliest being nine days before my due date, the second being two days before my due date. I opted for the earlier date because I was miserable and having awful Braxton Hicks contractions. And, I confess, the second date was February 14. I didn't want my son born on Valentine's Day.
Being able to choose the birthday of my child took away the excitement of going into labor, but the control freak in me was glad to be able to make plans.
Unfortunately, it's true that more and more c-sections are unnecessary. VBACs are generally completely safe and even have a better recovery rate than subsequent sections. For my part, I had my first four naturally - one even at home, although that was not completely intentional. The last two were an induction for stillbirth and then a c-section to keep that whole stillbirth thing from happening again.
There are times when it's necessary, but those times are much more rare than you'd think to hear most doctors talk. A breech should only be sectioned if attempts to get the baby facing the right way have failed AND the mother is completely exhausted or unconscious and unable to push. A severe cord entanglement like we had with the last two is another reason. My sister's oldest child was born with hypoplastic left-heart syndrome and would never have survived the birthing process - that's another reason. I'd never imagined having a section, but when we were facing it, it also seemed like a good time to go for a tubal ligation, thereby sidestepping further chances for my heart to get broken again.
When you elect to have a c-section, though, you're inviting problems whether it's a necessary procedure or not. Scar tissue does not allow your body's signals to get to where they're supposed to go, so you can develop all kinds of weird anomalous illnesses and problems, including a drastically odd menstrual cycle, colonic issues, even kidney problems and thyroid imbalances. The good news is that there are ways to treat the scars naturally without side effects, but the better news is that they are usually completely avoidable.
Then again... I imagine that someone who would elect for an unnecessary c-section would be more likely to allopathically medicate their problems instead of treating them naturally. Still, if you're faced with literally life and death as I was, it's good to know you're not automatically boofed in the end.
************************************
"... In some ways, the biggest influence on me writing was Punk. There was the idea that you could do something simply by doing it."
-- Neil Gaiman