Re: [ozmidwifery] c/s for breech

[James & Stephanie Fairbairn]

Title: Message

I have also read the 'natural birth' article offering the flip side to the C/S and at least there is some balance to this site - however they manage to make this N/Birth woman look exceptionally brave, extraordinary and financially secure enough to ba able to hire the private midwives and have the nice birth unit. It did not put it into context that this birth is NORMAL and perfectly feasible to most. It was commented by an american publication that if C/S rates do continue it will either bankrupt many health services or force a reduction in standards of care due to overstretching of the services. This is a fairly obvious conclusion and how do these 'experts' imagine we are all going to pay for it - especially as some obs. (v. small no. at present) are starting to hint that the more the C/S operation is perfected, the safer alternaitve it will become to ALL births and presumably the breech C/S recommendation is the thin end of the wedge when it comes to medical 'choices' for birth. Hmmmm Steph. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carolyn Donaghey To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 2:05 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] c/s for breech What is civilised about being dissected.  I see no reference in the article that this woman had any exposure to any informed information or people.  Just a bunch of girlfriends who obviously had the vaginal births from hell, over managed and intervened, one of which was an obstetrician who are notorious for wanting caesareans for themselves due to their own distorted view of birth - and the intelligent and sympathetic consultation with her obstetrician (who probably thought, 'sure thing, it makes my job so much easier, I get a bit more money from the government and then I get to see you throughout the rest of your life for all the potential complications you may suffer from the section'. Egad!  What a disastrous way of informing women about caesareans.  All I could keep thinking was, this must be an add supported by all those zillions of surgical organisations that have an interest in women having caesareans. Woe is me! Carolyn Vicki Chan wrote: 000601c25acb$f0ae9770$0100a8c0@NOTEBOOK type="cite"> but lucky to be oh so civilized! check this out!   http://www.mydr.com.au/default.asp?article=3614 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lynne Staff Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 9:30 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] c/s for breech And has changed her birthgiving life forever ----- Original Message ----- From: Sally Westbury To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:52 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] c/s for breech I hope that she is advised to sue. This is gross negligence. Sally Westbury