Dear Marilyn and list. I saw the segment and thought HO HUM here we go again. I felt they were somewhat disingenuous having a media denizen as spokesperson for pro-elective luscs, and the woman who lost her baby (for late LUSCS as the story implied) but who was also a documentary maker. Hardly your 'average' mother! These people thrive, indeed exist, because of controversy and therefore will be happy to create or perpetuate it. Justine did a fine job, but I felt was made by editing and camera angle to come across as somewhat belligerent. The obstetrician, predictably, blamed everyone but his own profession (justifiable blame, but not for 100%), taking himself off the hook for the rise in interventions.
As for Tracey Curro's excuse of preservation of the pelvic floor, that is such an old chestnut! What about all the women who have never given birth who have continence problems, and what about the research that tells us it's not giving birth so much as carrying the child that is the issue. And the growing evidence that even men in late life have continence issues due to pelvic floor problems. It seems while we focus on vaginal birth as the cause of women's continence problems we deviate money from public health and research into the real reasons and cures and spend it on expensive surgery. The argument about increased risk of losing a uterus infuriated me. The obstetrician suggested the rate was too small to worry about, and that most women would not mind losing their uterus if they didn't want more children anyway (an argument he justified by the low birth rate). I am almost menopausal, but want to take my uterus to my grave, never mind the fear of bleeding to death..... And he didn't address the fact that these complications (placenta increta, percreta, accreta) are on the rise so he can expect to see more as time goes by, nor was the problem of abnormally situated placentae and increased risk of miscarriage raised or addressed (research from USA where luscs have been much more common for a generation longer than here). No one seems game to really liken a medically unnecessary LUSCS to any other unnecessary surgery. Cosmetic surgery (for vanity not function or restoration which is plastic surgery) is not subsidised by taxpayers, and neither should unnecessary LUSCS be. If a woman wants to have LUSCS just to pick the day, she may, as far as I am concerned, but I don't want to pay for it when we can't get a hip replacement for a 70 year old pensioner. And as for the surgeon who performs it, would he cut off a perfectly good finger? Or make a long incision in a perfectly good arm? Then why in a perfectly healthy uterus? My dummy spit for the day! Trish Marilyn Kleidon wrote: > Excellent footage Justine. I was disappointed with the slant of the whole > segment though. We are being presented with promotions of caesarean birth. > Misinformation, misinformation, misinformation. We know that the number of > women seeking elective caesarean births for their first birth is around 1% > (I mean truly elective i.e. by choice with no medical/obstetric reason such > as malpresentation etc.) and yet it was portrayed as being the overall c/s > rate that is, around 30%. They (some of the obstetric community, not all but > some very vocal and public ob's) are doing with c/s what plastic surgeons > have done with botox and plastic surgery for the last 10 years. It is all > about the marketplace and consumerism. Everytime we participate in their so > called debate we end up in an infomercial for obstetric care and caesaren > birth normalisation. > > And you know I have no problem with women like Tracey Curo having the right > to have an elective c/s, in privacy. It is after all their bodies not mine. > Let us just not give them the space to promote it by pretending to be > participating in a public debate/discussion. Please note, I am not for > denying them the right to have their say, I am all for freedom of speech. I > don't want to debate her womanhood or mothering abilities or even her > extreme thinness. But I do not want her birth choices to become the only > options for my daughters. > > We seem to be in a turf war over what will a "normal" birth look like/be and > the ever shrinking number of new mothers. > > ooooh! I have to remember to breathe. > > marilyn > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "jayne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 5:20 AM > Subject: [ozmidwifery] 60 minutes. > > > > > Mmmmmmm, just how much is vaginal birth to blame for that serious medical > > issue of a weak pelvic floor? > > > > I wish they had of gone into the evidence....they just make it sound like > it > > is the traditionalist's word against the ob's. > > > > Did anyone else think Tracey Curo looked painfully thin? > > > > And Justine you have beautiful children and well done :) > > > > Jayne > > > > > > > > -- > > This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. > > Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe. > > > > -- > This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. > Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
