For what it's worth - this is what I emailed to ACA.

"I have just seen your feature and I write to express my concerns.

The feature appeared to trivialise a matter which is a major public health issue.  As was mentioned in your programme, a CS is major abdominal surgery with real risks to mother and baby.  For the baby, there is the increased risk of respitary distress which can mean long spells in intensive care.  For the mother -  infections of the scar and uterus, decreased mobility after birth, long term scar damage, and increased risk of infertility are all real risks. 

The World Health Organisation states that 10 to 15 percent of births can be expected to caesarean sections.  In Australia, the rate is nearing 30 percent - therefore 15 to 20 percent are unnecessary by WHO standards. 

The cost to the public (or private) purse is significantly higher for a section - not counting the cost for extra hospitalisations and extra medical care that may be required after the baby is born  - as a direct result of the section.

While the rate as steadily increased over the last few decades, the rate of maternal and fetal mortality and morbidity has not increased - indicating that increases in caesarean do not mean childbirth is any safer.

In the UK (where the section rate is also increasing), the Government have become so concerned and have determined that this issue is one of public health that they commissioned a nationwide survey into the trend - with a view to halting the increase.

While I would applaud a women's right to choose - this must also extend to a women's right to birth naturally.  At the moment, many women are being denied that right - through the lack of availability of the most appropriate people to attend healthy women in childbirth - midwives - who are having to stop their practice because of the withdrawal of professional indemnity insurance.  Indeed in many parts of Australia women who want to birth at home cannot do so - where is a women's choice then?"

Debbie
Perth, WA

Reply via email to