3 ms·
What's called for is research, not name-calling and doubting motivations. There IS absolutely objective and scientific justification to challenge the way thing
by alexandercrohde 7y ago
What's called for is research, not name-calling and doubting motivations.
There IS absolutely objective and scientific justification to challenge the way things are done at hospitals.
"In the United States, C-section rates have increased from just over 20% in 1996 to 33% in 2011.[3] This increase has not resulted in improved outcomes resulting in the position that C-sections may be done too frequently.[3]"
Now, how do all the factors weigh out? That's the research I'd like to see an informed and non-emotional party try to do. Most "opinions" on the topic only detract from the discussion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesarean_section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesarean_section
- souprock 7y agoIt is important to consider long-term effects. It is very easy to only look at the immediate survival of the baby or of the mother. Subsequent births are endangered by C section scars. Each scar is an area of uterus that is deficient in multiple ways. The eagerness to perform a C section is taking away the choice to have a large family. Early on, I didn't even know I'd want to choose a large family. If the first birth had been a C section, then ones afterward would more likely be C sections also, and I would have never gotten the chance to have a dozen kids. You can't have a dozen kids with a uterus that is turned into mincemeat. To allow for the possibility of having a large family, avoiding that first C section is important. All the interventions that increase the chances of it (epidural, induction, etc.) should thus also be avoided.