----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 9:59 PM
Subject: [ozmidwifery] Cs story
I am a mum whose first birth was by
caesarean, the next birth with medical interventions (forceps etc), and then a
natural vaginal birth. Pretty much done it all! It really concerns
me when people like Tracy Curio can make statements like a vaginal birth is
not a life changing essential rite of passage into mother or woman
hood....when she has never done it! Women who make comments about
experiences they have not lived should never make blanket comments. To
say something like that is not only arrogant but ignorant.
Nothing compares to birthing a baby naturally,
with no complications, with no fear and surrounded by those people who truly
care for you and your baby. There is nothing like it, there is no way to
describe it. Complicated vaginal birth is something that I have
experienced twice, it is for that reason that I feel that I can accurately
compare the experiences. For me to
finally birth a baby naturally and without fear or complications was
a major accomplishment and healed many sorrows. I feel that it is
understandable for Vanessa to chose her caesarean birth, but is her experience
reflective of the general population? Many women do have traumatic
vaginal birth experiences, but should we not be asking why? Why is
it that some hospitals have induction rates of over 50% and coincidently have
cs rates of 35% to 40%? Is there not correlation in this? Why
is it that all birth centres around the country are booked out
continuously? Why the newly introduced midwifery group practice in
Adelaide is having to double it's numbers next year from 500 women per year to
1000 due to the demand for midwifery led care. What is happening in
our labour wards under the medical model of care that makes major abdominal
surgery a preferred option?
The story presented by 60 minutes was fraught
with incorrect information: pelvic floor being 'saved' by cs...it is more
likely pregnancy hormones, botched or poorly timed medical interventions like
forceps and episiotomies, and the lack of pelvic floor exercising by women
that causes stress incontinences etc; and the story's total
exclusion of the serious complications from cs that are sadly becoming 'less
rare' as the more cs are done...life threatening events such as serious
placental complications
and even links with still birth in future
pregnancies.
Such biased and incorrect information being shown
to our birthing mothers is a sad reflection of our society loosing the
sacredness and importance of birth. On one aspect you are reporting
caesareans as being as normal as a vaginal birth (however you only
acknowledged the complicated vaginal birth scenario) but not once did the
reporter or those involved in the story refer to caesarean as a caesarean
birth.
C-Section, or caesarean section is the medical
terminology. We don't call the baby the foetus in every day speech do
we?
I watched the segment with interest,
but sadly was left disappointed and thinking once again: "you just
don't get it!"
Jo Bainbridge
Nairne, South Australia
