Home birth after cesarian

LTG is there no way you can speak to her husband about your fears,with the weight of her first baby there is every chance that another big baby can be on the way and if she has difficulties delivering again there could be problems,but lets hope all goes well she must certainly see a midwife or her doctor asap,I think the only way forward is with her partners help.Sorry I can't suggest anything better,but the knowledge of other GNers will be of help I'm sure. Good luck.

Oh you do have my sympathies as mother of a son who did something along the same lines. Won't go there now but it is a bit like someone joining a sect sometimes I know, the shutters go up.
Is this a private or an NHS midwife she is booked with?
If she has a midwife, then the midwife must know the history and will have consented to attend her at home.
How many weeks along is she? And do you live nearby or far away?

I sympathise completely.
Perhaps our members who are doctors or retired doctors could confirm that any information from a relative would not be passed on to the patient. I know that a doctor will not divulge information about a patient, but surely they would be willing to listen to important information that could affect the way they dealt with a patient.

Midwives and doctors are the specialists who will determine the safest place for her to give birth and will assess risks. I tried to have a home birth for my second child and all was fine until I was told he was breach, so the offer was withdrawn, much to my dismay. He turned a fortnight before the birth but they wouldn't capitulate. The next pregnancy, I went hell for leather for my home birth and for a couple of weeks it was agreed until the scan showed twins - back to hospital! If there are risks associated with the c-section scar (and there might not be), the medics will take that, size of baby, health of both mother and child, and isolation from emergency help into account.

Longtoothedgran I worked in the pregnancy/birth/babies field in an alternative way and am all for natural deliveries and home births BUT this sounds very risky. She may be allowed to labour naturally in hospital but she would be monitored very carefully and if the baby is that big again would almost certainly have a C. section. If you could persuade her to see her G.P he could at least check the size of her baby, check for diabetes, B.P. etc. and possibly clearly explain the risks. How has she got a midwife? is it a private midwife? If it is an NHS midwife then she will be attached to the surgery or hospital, perhaps she has seen her G.P. and doesn't want to admit she is igoring advice given? Perhaps she or you would like to look at the Birthlight website www.birthlight.com pro nature but definitely not into risks that would endanger mother and baby.
I feel for you and understand how helpless you must be feeling, On a different matter my daughter has made a decision that I am so worried about but am entirely unable to do anything about.

That is www.birthlight.com

Oh LTG how I do sympathise with you.
My D had a difficult first labour because she has a slight deviation in her coccyx, and the babe got so far and could not get through - she was in hospital at the time and they pulled him out, managing to get him round the obstruction.

Pregnant again she booked a private midwife and organised a home water birth. It seemed the height of folly to me, as we knew that the babe was likely to get stuck, but she was determined and the midwife seemed unperturbed. In the end she laboured (in agony because babe was stuck) and then was ambulanced in to hospital for a forceps delivery. Lots of unnecessary suffering.

I was within a hair's breadth of telling the midwife that I thought she was making the wrong decision, but held back. All's well that ends well as babe is fine, but my D has serious piles which cannot be unrelated to the fruitless pushing.

On a more positive note, another D had a caesarian with the first and went on to have two normal vaginal deliveries - but both in hospital.

I do not know where this rejection of science comes from - people have worked long and hard over centuries to make labour safe and we are so privileged to be in this position. All this airy-fairy stuff about home deliveries is absolutely fine when it is a low-risk pregnancy, but is nonsense when there are known problems.

I cannot tell you how I feel for you - I have been in the same position and bit my tongue. Can you marshal some statistics from the net that might sway her mind? Or else, go to your own GP and express your worries and ask if they are groundless so that you have some concrete information to either settle your mind or make you decide to tackle it with her? The idea of going behind D's back is so hard - you jeopardise your future relationship, and I was in exactly the same boat, so my heart goes out to you.

One of the problems is that we, and our children, are so insulated from the realities of obstructed labour because we have the benefit of modern science - if we lived in parts of the third world, we would know only too well what the problems are and would grab the help with both hands.

I can only wish you heaps of luck and send my good wishes.

Nice post mishap . My DDIL had an obstructed labour first time. Fortunately all were agreed that C sect was the only option second time around. I used to be an NCT teacher and had DS2 at home - but i was fully behind this elective C.
The rejection of science is interesting and I have spent a lot of time thinking about it while writing my book. I think we started falling out of love with science on the day of Hiroshima. Then there was thalidomide, Silent Spring etc.
The generation that grew up in the 70s with vaccinations, antibiotics etc had no experience of TB, high childhood mortality and the risks of childbirth. This all combined with the marketing of alternatives, the wisdom of the orient and all things natural and herbal...
Oh an there is a lot of right wing anti-scientific stuff going on, on the other side of the atlantic. Anti evolution etc. You can even find people on the internet that don't "believe" in the germ theory of disease.
I was talking to an american friend about people who refuse vaccinations for their children. UK and in Australia these people are on a hippy/alternative agenda. In the states many of them are far right "the state shall not interfere" types.

I guess that, as women we have a basic need to understand what it is like to 'give birth naturally', and, having been thwarted at the first attempt it's 'unfinished business'. The birth of my daughter was such a mess, no caesarian but rush from one hospital to another in an amblulance, epidural which meant I couln't push when asked to and resulted in a mid cavity forceps delivery. When I had my second baby, and felt the need to push, all I could think was 'so that's what it should have felt like' and can remember that moment thirty years later. I treasure that moment. Having siad that, your daughter could surely go to the hospital on the understanding that she has as natural a birth as possible; I thought some hospitals had birthing pools and such like. But, then again, from memory I waited till the last possible moment to go to hospital the second time because of the fear of other people taking control. The day that we give birth to our children stays with us forever; no other time is so etched in our memory. We want it to be perfect, I suppose.

I would be intrigued to know what your book is JessM! Do tell.

My first two children did not have the whooping cough vaccination because it was in the middle of a scare - one went on to be very ill with whooping cough and her chest problems went on throughout her childhood as a result - third child had the vaccination on the dot!! My OH was a doctor at the time and he had never seen the results of the disease so went along with the no vaccination.

Herein lies the problem. Part of the reason that we reject some science is because we basically do not understand a lot of it and feel that we are in their hands - a situation made worse when scientists disagree.

But there is also a strange idea that natural = good. We have discussed this before on another thread. Natural does not equate with good - natural is HIV, TB, natural disasters, epidemic diseases, death in childbirth, congenital disorders, and so on ad nauseam. Generations of human ingenuity have gone into protecting us from "natural."

I think that the reason people have latched on to "natural" is because of a distrust of scientists and science, as you point out - thalidomide, Hiroshima. Because we do not always understand what they are saying it engenders fear and mistrust.

There is also the cult of individual freedom (a laudable value that has been misused to undermine our sense of community) which makes us reluctant to be told what to do and to accept that someone else knows best.

I never had any desire to experience natural childbirth if it put me or the babe at risk - a healthy Mum and healthy baby were the only outcomes that I aspired to.

I think that maternity units work very hard nowadays to minimise intervention to only that which is essential and to create a comfortable homely atmosphere where mothers can get the best of both worlds. We should be happy that this is so and that infant and maternal mortality are so low. Childbirth is indeed natural, but it is a hazardous process for both mother and baby, and we have been insulated for that basic fact for a long time now.

Part of the reason for "not understanding the science" is as Jeni said on another thread ask two doctors, get three opinions. While "natural" may be all those things it is also have many positive aspects and while "scientific" may have brought us many benefits it has also brought us horrors. Not just the big things as quoted but smaller impacts on our everyday lives.

I suspect when you had your babies you had the bath shave & enema, they don't do that any more also in the 70's most mums had episiotomies because they thought they healed better than tearing. They now know this is'nt so and no longer do it. Hospitals have to follow procedures even when the staff think they don't make sense.

When I was working in Essex we had a superb midwife led birth unit that mums could choose if a straightforward birth was expected but if they went to the Consultant led hospital they had a very high chance of ending up with a C. section. There were rules about the timing of how things progressed (I'm not talking about the length of labour here) and if mums did not perform to time then they were heading for a sectioneven when there was no distress or other problems. In some of my classes 50% of the mums had had sections. The same hospital also installed a birthing pool towards the end of my time there but they only had half a midwife who was trained to use it. Yes, you or I would call them part time but the hospital counted them as "half". The result being unless you were lucky enough to have your baby in the 16 hours a week she was on duty you were out of luck. My mums who went to the birth unit said it was like a hotel. They had their babies in peace and privacy in a calm and relaxed atmosphere. Sadly this cannot usually be said for NHS hospitals.

Many consultants are men and trained quite a while ago they seem unable or unwilling to take on new ideas - even when they are scientifically supported. Why are the mothers on "One born every minute" still giving birth lying on their backs? Actually there are still some of the older midwives who are resistant to new ideas. One of my mums was on all fours when the midwife came in and said "I don't deliver in that position" and mum to be with great aplomb said "Well go and find me someone who does"

Zephrine I think a few things have changed but not a lot. I had one hospital birth with pethidene, episiotomy and enema. One home birth without any of the above. There were some good midwife led units around 30 years ago. Strikes me there is now more choice in theory but the C rate has shot up...
Having said all that, then as now, I'm sure you would agree there are some mums who need to have a C section or to be treated as higher risk.
I agree with Mishap - this is not a matter of medical opinions, it is a more fundamental rejection of science.
Really "nature" when it comes to childbirth is not benign. It is wasteful. Childbirth has become over medicalised as you suggest due to gender politics rather than science.

Absolutely Jess I wouldn't want anyone to not opt for a section when they needed one. I also think that some of the rejection of science is to do with the amount of "scientific information" that we are bombarded with daily e.g. coffee/red wine etc is good for you/bad for you.
I only retired three years ago so the examples I quoted were recent.

One of the reasons for the increase in c section is that it is now as safe as a "normal" delivery. It is not because the surgeons are "scalpel happy." Faced with the trauma of a difficult instrumental delivery it is now undoubtedly a better option. Quicker recovery, less pelvic damage to lead to future problems. How lucky we are that this is so.

The c section rate used to be lower because of the need for a general anaesthetic (with the inherent dangers of this especially in an emergency) so the balance of risk was in favour of a forceps delivery. The balance is in the other direction now.

Thankyou for your support and sympathy. I will keep trying to see if there is anyone she will listen to. I would like to know that her doctor is fully aware of the situation. Will keep you posted. Its good to know that it's not just me being a neurotic Mum. Have contacted bitrhlight. Thanks.