Hospital with a 70.5% c-section rate.

robyn2201 · June 2010

There is a hospital near where I live that has a 70.5% c-section rate. This hospital does not accept high risk patients and does not have a high level NICU.

https://www.theunnecesarean.com/blog/2010/4/9/california-cesarean-rates-by-hospital-2008.html

Absolutely crazy!

brooke9280 · June 2010

That is horrific! Thank you for posting this!

I am delivering with a midwife at one of the hospitals listed (at about 23% rate). I am always shocked at how many people schedule their c-sections at my OBs for convenience.

TMNTgirl · June 2010

Wow - that is pretty crazy!

I saw that the hospital that I was born at has a 43% rate. But it probably wasn't like that 25 years ago when my mom was there and had a natural birth with me. (I was born in the bay area)

The hospital that I'll be delivering at has a 30% rate. Pretty much on par with the national average. But it has a high level NICU, so hopefully that is a lot of it.

My prenatal yoga teacher told me that she has been hearing a lot of good birth stories coming out of my hospital lately from people who took her class. So I'm hoping that's a good sign for me!

CTri17 · June 2010

are you for freaking real? that is gross!

strangebird · June 2010

That's alarming. Not to impune your state, by I'm going to hope this is due to location . . . I have a lot of family in California and I've heard them say that people seem to be on opposite ends of the spectrum there, with no middle ground, hardcore naturalists having their baby's at home in their living rooms or, give me the spinal in the parking lot scheduling their c-sections at twelve weeks gestation.

emilysbeaulieu · June 2010

I'm just wondering at what point will they draw the line into criminal. That is SOOOOO much unnecessary surgery. At some point they need to start being accountable for their actions. it's just so wrong.

HRMJPC · June 2010

Wow. So, if a mother in labor so much as vomits, I am sure she is wheeled into the OR.

That L&D should really close doors. I am surprised that they don't lose contracts with insurance companies as that must cost them so much money!

CrazyToast · June 2010

Thankfully mine is down at something like 27%...thanks for posting this!! The hospital people could not seem to answer this question when on our hospital tour...

MrsTiara · June 2010

The hospital I was born at was 38.8%. Even in my midwife-friendly area that I live in now (we have a midwifery school), all of the local hospitals have a 30%+ c-section rate.

I continue to be astonished that health insurance, with all of it's cost-cutting save a buck and forget the patient ways does not encourage more midwife-attended births. Let alone cover them. This would be such an amazing way to both save money in this country and save lives. Imagine that, a win/win situation with insurance companies!!

zoe_cat · June 2010

Um, wow, that's nuts. I would not set foot in that hospital! My hospital has an 8% first time c-section rate. Woo hoo!

flyer23 · June 2010

That's crazy! The hospital where DD was born came in at just over 30%, and it does accept high risk patients and does have a high level NICU.

I haven't seen overall c-section rates here in Texas, but the hospital right around the corner from me has about a 30% primary c-section rate, and an 0.5% VBAC rate, so you know the overall rate must be higher. And it also doesn't have a high level NICU. And it does have worse-than-average rates of maternal and neonatal complications. When I was planning hospital birth, I was at a hospital with a high level NICU that had a primary c-section rate under 20%... there's a reason why I was willing to drive 30 mins to go there, rather than the nearby hospital.

mh2t · June 2010

That's completely ridiculous.

mzclaire · June 2010

strangebird:

That's alarming. Not to impune your state, by I'm going to hope this is due to location . . . I have a lot of family in California and I've heard them say that people seem to be on opposite ends of the spectrum there, with no middle ground, hardcore naturalists having their baby's at home in their living rooms or, give me the spinal in the parking lot scheduling their c-sections at twelve weeks gestation.

Yup. I live in CA, and I can state for a fact that we get ALL kinds here. Sadly, statewide we have a c-section ave of 34%.

From what I understand, the c-sections tend to happen at the top and bottom ends of the income bracket. You have the high-income ladies who schedule surgery (for reasons from convenience to not wanting to stretch out the vagina...) and then you have the very low-income/poverty women who didn't get the proper prenatal care, didn't educate themselves on thier options, and may have high risk births, or who can only afford to go to the free clinic where it's often easier (on over-worked staff, not the mom) to operate rather than guide a woman through prolonged labor.

sad, but true.

d.cubed · June 2010

strangebird:
That's alarming. Not to impune your state, by I'm going to hope this is due to location . . . I have a lot of family in California and I've heard them say that people seem to be on opposite ends of the spectrum there, with no middle ground, hardcore naturalists having their baby's at home in their living rooms or, give me the spinal in the parking lot scheduling their c-sections at twelve weeks gestation.

This cracks me up because I'm finding that you're right! I'm one of the "living room" moms, but lots of my friends are the "can I get the epi at the beginning of my 3rd tri?" types. Not a lot of middle ground around here!

Want a personalized experience?

Hospital with a 70.5% c-section rate.

Re: Hospital with a 70.5% c-section rate.

Choose Another Board

Search Boards