3 ms·

When there are problems, you operate. Otherwise it’s preferable for natural birth for mother and baby, for reasons mentioned above.

• KaiserPro 8y ago
  no. There are a whole host of reasons for having a c-section. The risk of having a massive tear (ie vag to arse(4c tear), or literally tearing a new arsehole) is 1 in 4. This has long term life altering consequences. An "elective" c-section is not the same as "booking in". The less "identity politics" that are wrapped up in this, the better.
  • iforgotpassword 8y ago
    No. > The risk of having a massive tear (ie vag to arse(4c tear), or literally tearing a new arsehole) is 1 in 4. Yes and it usually heals very well. The tissue there is made to deal with that. My sister had that happen 5 years ago, it even continued into her gut for a few cm. So that was a very bad case, but it still healed perfectly, although it took about 3 month.
    • KaiserPro 8y ago
      ... 3 months. Unless she had corrective surgery then she's almost certainly got some level of incontinence. There will(or should) have been physiotherapy to get some semblance control back. Look, there is nothing wrong with a c-section or a vaginal delivery. To make women feel that they are somehow inferior for having one is totally unacceptable. Something like 10-20% of births endup in caesarian, otherwise there is a massive chance of a bad outcome for both child and mother. Source: wife who is a paediatrician and attends lots of births where the child is in distress.