Birth Stories
SFAug07
member
Options
Elective c-section?
SFAug07
member
I have been thinking about an elective c-section. I am very small (size 0, 5'6") and DH is 6'4", so I am dreading a huge baby getting out with my tiny body.
Anybody had one? Any experience/tips?
Warning
No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Elective c-section?
I'm having an elective C-section but... I had a c-section with DS and am carrying twins right now so it's not really "elective" it's my safest option.
Did notice this birth story a few pages down but didn't read it.
https://community.thebump.com/cs/ks/forums/thread/3893156.aspx
Friend of my family is 5'0" tall and her dh was 6'4". She had 2 boys in 2 years both 10 lbs babies. She had a ton of problems, incontinence ongoing for years, huge tears and basically her whole urinary tract was buggered and had to be surgically reconstructured.?
Not worth it.
That said she was a lot smaller than you, she was a tiny chinese girl who I could literally pick up and carry at school (though ?I am only 5'2" myself).
There's nothing wrong with elective c sections if you are happy with it and your insurance will cover it. All that matters is a healthy baby and you are just as likely to get one that way as any other no matter what the naturalists say. The problems in c section babies almost always drive the need for a c section not the other way round.
GL!?
ooooh I wouldn't ever elect to have a c-section, no thank you. Recovery does not sound fun. I was up and out and about the day after I had my dd.
My mother was 5 feet and 96lbs when she got pg with me. She had me naturally just fine then went on to do it again but this time with a 9lb baby.
A c-section is major abdominal surgery and puts both you and the baby at a higher risk than a vaginal delivery. Talk to your doctor about this and get much more information before you go down this path.
FWIW, the women in my family are all very petite. My mom had natural childbirth with all 3 of her kids. No problems. Womens' bodies are designed to give birth.
They say that you grow the size baby that you can deliver. With that being said, I am 5'3" and DH is 6'3". We were both average size babies and I couldn't deliver my DS. He was turned on his side and never descended after 28 hours of labor. I may have been able to deliver him had he not been on his side, who knows. My mom and sister are both about my size, had babies around the same size as mine and delivered all of theirs naturally (and they were all facing posterior). So, it can be done.
I don't think I would elect to have a c-sec from the beginning just based on size. Wait and see what happens with your PG. Your OB will probably do an u/s near the end b/c of your concerns and, while they're not always reliable, if s/he thinks you're having a large baby a c-sec may be offered. There are more risks with delivering a large baby that many OBs would like to avoid if possible. But, your baby may not be too large. At the very least, it is good to go into labor on your own and see what your body can handle. If you can't deliver vaginally, then you can have a c-sec and you have your answer for subsequent PGs.
Good luck!
I wanted a section with Emerson but, felt guilty about it. My dr told me that she would do whatever I wanted her to do.
I ended up being induced and was in labor for 5 hours....long story short, I ended up with a section and am absolutely happy that I did. The recovery was easy. In the end my dr said, it's basically where you want to be cut-your belly or your vag.....easy choice for me!
Thank you everybody for your thoughts! It is interesting that so many women respond so negatively to this. I actually already did quite a bit of research on it and most if it says that these days, the risk to mother and child is the same for c-section and vaginal delivery. I don't see anything heroic in giving birth without pain killers or vaginally - but I think it is every woman's choice to go the route they feel most comfortable with.
I certainly don't have a low pain threshold - I am a serious marathon runner and have run 29 marathons in the last 6 years, and have some serious injuries that were pretty painful too. Although I am not that short, I am really small - I have hips like a teenager and weigh around 105 pounds at 5'6". I doubt that I'd have great birthing hips.
Thanks to the poster who posted the link to the story of the elective c-section! This was really helpful and I hadn't seen it.
As a NICU nurse I would like to disagree with you and say that a vaginal delivery is in no way as risky as a c-section to a baby. There is a reason that your body is designed to deliver vaginally. The process of pushing your baby out pushes the fluid out of your babies lungs in a much needed way.
That being said, there are many cases where c-sections are absolutely needed for mother and baby, and I do no argue with that. I believe if you pose this question to any NICU or labor and delivery nurse they would tell you that a c-section poses much greater risks to mother and baby, I'm not sure why anyone would chose it electively.
I think you should discuss it further with your o/b. Having had a c-section, I can say I'd NEVER elect one. I had an emergency one with a 10 pound baby NOT b/c I couldn't fit her through (and I'm small, with a 6/4 husband), but b/c she passed meconium and her heartrate was dropping. Your ob will be able to assess whether your body can accommodate a baby through the canal.
My c-section was the most traumatic, awful, painful (recovery wise physically AND emotionally), and I would never recommend anyone "elect" one without a good medically-necessary reason. I'll add also that the past c-section is causing complications with my current pregnancy, too. It was so awful I'm actually planning a vbac.
Seriously think about your reasons for this. Small women deliver babies vaginally all the time (even large babies).
O.M.G.
I had to post to this.... I did not have an elective c/s. I had to have one because my DS was frank breech and would not turn. My OB said after she opened me up that I would not have been able to push him out either due to some other circumstances that are not normal for most others. It is major surgery. The recovery was not fun. Your body is not going to give you a bigger baby than you can handle for the most part. My OB also thought I'd have a very big baby due to GD, but he was an average 8 pounds 3 ounces.
I'll be honest that I am now sad at the fact that my next (and last) baby will be delivered via c/s and that I will not get to a birthing experience of my choice. Back then, I was happy to get him out as a healthy baby because of all the complications and I got sick of him trying to escape so frequently preterm.
If you really want to elect to have a c/s please actually TALK to other women that have had c/s elective or not to get an idea of the different things that you could be facing between the surgery itself (how it's done) and the recovery (which is not just the 6 weeks until your doc gives you the all clear to exercise again). Recovery is not the same for everyone, but there are things I wish I had known were going to be the norm since DS was born. I still have barely any feeling from my naval to my scar when I touch there. Plus, my incision area still has days that it hurts. Plus, itching doesn't just itch, it literally hurts and scratching does nothing to relieve it because I can't feel it. Oh, and from what I've been told is that I may never get the feeling back there, but if I do it will take years for that to occur. Those are some of the down sides. The only thing I got lucky on is that my scar is pencil thin and has become invisible in one spot, like I was never cut at all. I wouldn't elect to have one personally. This decision was taken out of my hands and I will not be able to attempt a VBAC either because of other issues. Please don't think that a c/s is something of a breeze to walk through, it's not.
Sapphyr you are completely inconsistent - you won't get a bigger baby than you can deliver and then you say you own OB said you would NOT have been able to deliver yours.
Emergency c sections are stressful, you get all the bad side of labor and none of the benefits of a c section (ie avoiding exhaustion). If you feel you are likely to have a big difficult baby and maybe end up with an emergency c section I think an elective makes a LOT of sense. They are a LOT easier. They are essentially an entirely DIFFERENT operation.
Since I've had upwards of 30 major surgeries I find the so-called side effects of your c section completely unbelievable. I doubt they are the c section at all.
My honest opinion is people are so unfoundedly scared of hospitals, doctors and surgery that most of their "problems" are in their heads. ?Having spent nearly 2 years of my life in a hospital I actually find them quite comforting places :-) And that's DESPITE the bytchtrolls in the postpartum ward when I had DS.
Do you actually read?
She said nothing about her baby being too big to deliver. The baby was frank breech and would not turn, thereby making vaginal delivery impossible. Position and size are not the same thing. HTH.
Every midwife and OB I've spoken to has told me that most women's bodies will grow a baby that is the right size to be able to be born vaginally. It would be against nature for your body to grow a baby that is too big to be born; after all, women didn't always have the option of having a c section!
The only argument to the contrary I've heard is that if you develop gestational diabetes, it can cause the baby to grow abnormally large and cause you to need a c section to deliver it.
I wouldn't worry about it too much - even though your husband sounds pretty big and tall, your genes are in there too!
Mrs Culotta - the reason you're wrong is a reason many people are wrong, a misunderstanding of evolution.
As we evolved yes we did "generally" have babies the right size. But there were always aberrations and we don't know how many because those mothers and babies DIED. We know the death rates were huge, we just don't know the breakdown of cause of death but it is a fair deduction that this accounted for at least a proportion. The fact that we no longer consider those deaths acceptable is to be applauded.
Second, to the extent that we didn't have babies too big to deliver (in general) this was largely because of homogenous gene pools. Evolution doesn't work fast. The last changes to the human body in terms of delivery of babies occurred many thousands of years ago, probably 5000+ years ago. Back then we had kids with men of the same or related tribes. They were not of a different gene pool, or as we would call it ethnic group. There were no throwbacks to the father's 6'6" grandfather because he wouldn't have had one (if he was only 5'8").
With diversity of population and wide variation in height genes even in the supposedly homogenous white American population - the mismatch of baby size to mother's pelvis is MUCH more of an issue than it was on the east african plains 10,000 years ago.?
btw as proof of my point to Mrs Culotta - look at the incidence of fistula in east and subsaharan african populations TODAY. It is quite high hence the fistula hospitals needing to be set up and doing a roaring trade helping these young women.
Why do you get fistula? Long obstructed labor, usually caused by a mismatch between the baby's size and the mother's pelvis. THESE are the control group showing what happens when you don't do c sections. Many of the women die but those who don't almost always give birth to dead babies and are incontinent (fecal and urinary) until the operation.
This is a population untouched by evil OBs and their c section ways. It proves that there will always be some women (perhaps a high proportion) for whom size mismatch is an issue. EVEN in communities that are relatively homogenous by modern standards.?
?
cassep I've never run a marathon in my life (and wouldn't want to) but wtf has that got to do with it? C section v vag is not about pain, you can have a painless vag labour if you choose and if you don't you're a nutter imho.
Your reply seems directed only at pain which entirely misunderstands the post.
Also yes small women give birth vaginally all the time. Those with right sized babies are fine. Those with humungous babies are either not fine (get fistula in Africa) or get a much less pleasant c section as an emergency (in the first world).?
?
Casssep, it is actually 29 marathons by now. I also don't see how this has anything to do with giving birth. I am just considering my options here.
What would be a good reason to consider an elective c-section in your mind? That I don't feel I will enjoy the 'blissful experience' of giving birth? That I know I won't feel I missed out if I can't be in hours and hours of pain when instead it could take 5 minutes? I don't see anything heroic in vaginal birth.
Rest assured, from one who had ?hours of agony before ?the epidural which was turned back against my wishes... you are not missing out on anything.
The baby is what matters not how it gets here. This whole board is loopy in that respect. Birth stories only matter in terms of education for others, it really doesn't matter a bit how your baby got here.?
There is no good reason to have an elective c-section. I never said giving birth was a blissful experience. If you have an epidural you won't have hours and hours of pain. You don't know how long your labor will last. So, you think there will be no pain involved in a c-section. Good luck with that.
You are the one that mentioned you have run 29 marathons.
The marathons were in response to 'lazy and scared' from one of the previous posters. I don't think I could be seen as lazy and the marathons were part of that argument.
I never said I think there won't be any pain with the c-section. I know it is surgery and there will be pain in the recovery. I am pretty sure there is pain in the recovery from a vaginal birth too. I like the aspect of being in control with a scheduled c-section.
Some people on this board and in general on the Nest make birthing out to be the 'wonderful experience you want to have' and I don't share this desire. I'd rather avoid it as much as possible. The baby is what matters, not the act of giving birth.
The decision about how to deliver should be made by considering what your safest option is and I would listen to what your doctor says. You may not feel that you will enjoy birth but I doubt you'll enjoy a c-section either. I had an emergency c-section with my first baby and I was in a lot of pain for the next week.
SFAug07 just want to post in support of your consideration of all options.
My Dr presented me with the pros/cons of both options for me and my baby and a c-section was the better option. Just remember do your research, listen to your Dr and make the decision that is best for you. good luck!
I am also a NICU nurse and completely agree. Too often we see babies who are born by elective c-section and they weren't quite ready yet (breathing problems, temp problems, eating problems, etc), even when delivered at 38+weeks. Some of the sickest babies I've seen have been from elective sections. I would NEVER do one, unless it was a repeat c-section.
As for your feelings about not missing anything by delivering vag, some would agree and some would disagree. I would disagree. I LOVED my L&D experience. I would do it all over again in a heartbeat. Yeah, it was painful and I didn't have an epi, but it was beyond worth it. I loved pushing, I have never felt that kind of rush in my life or that kind of control. Immediatly after my DS's birth, I had so much energy I just wanted to get up and dance around the room and parade DS down the halls showing him off. I was on cloud 9 for days. It was a feeling I will never forget. It was amazing. That said, I had a 2.5hour labor and delivery, which includes 20min of pushing...so not the norm. I'm sure many women out there would disagree with me, but I would feel like I had missed out if I didn't get to experience what I did.
Blog
Miles Alister. 9.17.2007. 8# 6oz 21.5inches
Isla Penelope. 10.21.2010. 8# 3oz 21 inches
2 Months 11# 6oz 23.5 inches
4 Months 13# 6oz 25 inches
6 Months 14# 15oz 27 inches
9 Months 17# 10oz 28 inches
12 Months 19# 10oz 28.75 inches
The only reason why I would not have an elective c-section would be if insurance would not cover it.
It is YOUR body and YOUR choice. I had a section and I will NOT be attempting a VBAC next time, I will be having another c section. It went fine, I had a wonderful dr., and he will be doing my next section. Recovery was fine and I didn't even have to take pain killers once out of the hospital.
People have opinions about EVERYTHING, especially hot-buttons like this one. And of course, they think they're opinions are 100% correct even though they've NEVER ACTUALLY GONE THRU THE EXPIERENCE THEMSELVES. I feel as you do in the fact that it only matters that you are holding your healthy baby in your arms, not how it got here, or how many/few stitches you have in your crotch afterwards.
Good Luck w/ everything!!!
I'm not going to say whether it's a good idea either way, I just wouldn't worry if I were you about having a baby that's too large. I was only about 110 lbs when I got pregnant w/ my first and I'm 5'10". When my Dr. measured my pelvic bones in about my 7th month he said that they were very close set and that I wouldn't be able to give birth to a baby over 8lbs. DH is tall and my dad is 6'7" so I knew I would have a large baby. Well DS was born 4 weeks early and weighed EXACTLY 8lbs. He would have been 10 or 11 lbs if he was full term so I got lucky in the fact that he was still small enough for me to give birth to. So nature does have a way of working itself out.