An overwhelming majority of people I meet who have had c-sections are so grateful that they were able to get their baby out safely. They say that if it weren’t for them, they might be dead or their baby might be dead. However, according to the World Health Organisation (WHO), caesarean sections should only be performed when medically necessary – no more than about 10%-15% of all births. So what about the 10% of women who are still getting c-sections in the UK, but they aren’t medically necessary? Why does it seem like the c-section rate is growing still? Women are still getting unnecessary c-sections and I think it’s due to lack of knowledge and preparation. Doctors tell every c-section patient that it was medically necessary, but that’s not what the statistics show.
Unfortunately, the doctors tell c-section patients a reason to justify the need for the c-section. I’m going to list a couple of common reasons given for c-sections and why they are not valid reasons for this major abdominal surgery. Continue reading
Is this even possible? Yes. Today, “fetal distress” is a leading cause for a c-section. So how can it be avoided?
How to Avoid Fetal Distress
1. Refuse EFM, Electronic Fetal Monitoring. This is your birth. This should be your choice. Many hospitals may ‘require’ you to be monitored using EFM; however, you have the choice to refuse! If you don’t have to guts to refuse a health professional, then I advise hiring a doula to speak for you. Why is this important? There is significant data that shows the increased risk of c-section with an increase of EFM use. Here’s a quote from the 2005 Practice Bulletin #70 of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists:
“Despite its widespread use, there is controversy about the efficacy of EFM. Moreover, there is evidence that the use of EFM increases the rate of cesarean and operative vaginal deliveries. Given that the available data do not clearly support the use of EFM over intermittent ausculation, either option is acceptable in a patient without complications.” (Obstetrics and Gynecology, Intrapartum Fetal Heart-Rate Monitoring 106 (6), 1463-1561.)