# Can you refuse C/S at the hospital?



## EviesMom (Nov 30, 2004)

Short story: DD was breech, and I'd been planning a version and doing accupuncture, etc., but went into labor early. And ended up with a c-section. I'm past it, but I was looking around in here contemplating VBACs and UC and I started wondering about dd's birth... Although it was 2 1/2 years ago!

What would have happened if I went to the hospital but said "no" to the c-section or refused to sign the consent forms. Would they tell me they wouldn't let me birth there? Kick me out? Would I have been able to try for a vaginal birth? Has anybody done such a thing? What was the reaction and outcome? I'm curious!


----------



## rmzbm (Jul 8, 2005)

You can refuse anything. They cannot turn you away in active labor.







Good luck!


----------



## turtlewomyn (Jun 5, 2005)

I don't have personal experience with this, but some women use this as a way to get a vbac. I have heard lots of horror stories about this too. They have to take you, if you say no to the c-section they aren't supposed to do it. If you sign any of their blanket consent forms (or your husband does) it gives them the OK though. I just read a story about a mom who was given "oxygen" and they actually put her under general anesthesia and did a c-section. She was pushing at the time. They had to push the baby up the birth canal (he was crowning I think) to get it out for the c-section. The only reason for this was that hospital policy did not allow VBAC.
So yes, you could do this, you may be faced with them telling you that you will kill your baby, and they may physically assault you to force you to have a c-section. Some women have succeeded at this though.
www.ican-online.org is a great site for c-section information and they have an email group where you could find more stories.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EviesMom* 
Short story: DD was breech, and I'd been planning a version and doing accupuncture, etc., but went into labor early. And ended up with a c-section. I'm past it, but I was looking around in here contemplating VBACs and UC and I started wondering about dd's birth... Although it was 2 1/2 years ago!

What would have happened if I went to the hospital but said "no" to the c-section or refused to sign the consent forms. Would they tell me they wouldn't let me birth there? Kick me out? Would I have been able to try for a vaginal birth? Has anybody done such a thing? What was the reaction and outcome? I'm curious!

The lone voice of dissent...

Be glad you were spared the version. They are dangerous. Crazy dangerous and you may have ended up with a csection anyway, an emergency one which would not have been cool. Your baby chose to be breech for a reason, trust that your baby knew what he/she was doing.
Also, think about this, maybe a csection was the best option for you at that time based on your previous choices. Many OBs are not trained in vaginal breech deliveries, and if they are untrained, well that could have been a dangerous situation for your child. There is a good amount of risk to first time mothers having breech babies, but its glossed over here.

Frankly, you could have demanded no csection and been handed a resident to attend you had you been at a teaching hospital all the while while they harrassed you into consenting to a surgical birth. You would have entered into a hostile enviroment, and maybe even a legal one. You also could have left AMA and gone to a second hospital or just gone home to tough things out on your own.

Personally I would play the what "if" game because what is done is done, but you can make different choices, more informed choices before you bring another kid into the world.


----------



## coloradoalice (Oct 12, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EviesMom* 
Short story: DD was breech, and I'd been planning a version and doing accupuncture, etc., but went into labor early. And ended up with a c-section. I'm past it, but I was looking around in here contemplating VBACs and UC and I started wondering about dd's birth... Although it was 2 1/2 years ago!

What would have happened if I went to the hospital but said "no" to the c-section or refused to sign the consent forms. Would they tell me they wouldn't let me birth there? Kick me out? Would I have been able to try for a vaginal birth? Has anybody done such a thing? What was the reaction and outcome? I'm curious!

If the doctors knew baby was breech I don't think it would have mattered if you signed consent or not. At some point they would have decided that it was an emergent situation and that the baby needed to be delivered. If they had policy against breech you were probably stuck. They can give you a c-section at almost any point in the birth, so they probably would have just waited til you were beyond being able to say no, and then done it. The majority or hospitals won't do vaginal breech. And in some states midwives are not allowd to do them at home. It's just one of those very unfortunate things.


----------



## Mavournin (Jul 9, 2002)

There have been stories of women refusing cesareans and hospitals obtaining court orders to do them.

But, that said, if you are planning another pregnancy, I would find a VBAC-friendly provider and birth location and go for it. Get involved with ICAN now. In most cases women who had a previous c/s for a breech baby are great candidates for VBAC.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
Be glad you were spared the version. They are dangerous. Crazy dangerous and you may have ended up with a csection anyway, an emergency one which would not have been cool.

If versions were so dangerous practioners wouldn't offer them or make referrals to those who specialize in them. In fact, external versions have become more widely used over the past 15 years or so based on their strong safety record and approximate 65% success rate. I can't imagine that a physician or midwife would refer a patient for a version if there was any question at all for that woman's personal safety or the safety of her baby. If a medical reason precludes attempting a version for a vaginal birth over a surgical one, I also imagine that would be explained in detail.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
Also, think about this, maybe a csection was the best option for you at that time based on your previous choices.

What a horrendous statement. Why on earth would you try and make this mother feel guilty for wanting to attempt a vaginal birth? Maybe her "previous choices" were what was best for her. Who are you to stand and make judgement?


----------



## InstinctiveMama (Sep 4, 2006)

OnTheFence said:


> The lone voice of dissent...
> 
> Be glad you were spared the version. They are dangerous. Crazy dangerous and you may have ended up with a csection anyway, an emergency one which would not have been cool. Your baby chose to be breech for a reason, trust that your baby knew what he/she was doing.
> Also, think about this, maybe a csection was the best option for you at that time based on your previous choices. Many OBs are not trained in vaginal breech deliveries, and if they are untrained, well that could have been a dangerous situation for your child. There is a good amount of risk to first time mothers having breech babies, but its glossed over here.
> ...


----------



## InstinctiveMama (Sep 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *turtlewomyn* 
www.ican-online.org is a great site for c-section information and they have an email group where you could find more stories.

I second this. ICAN is a wonderful source for research-based information on c-sections and VBACs. You can even talk online with mothers in your area who can give you the scoop on local OBs, midwives and hospitals.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mavournin* 
There have been stories of women refusing cesareans and hospitals obtaining court orders to do them.

But, that said, if you are planning another pregnancy, I would find a VBAC-friendly provider and birth location and go for it. Get involved with ICAN now. In most cases women who had a previous c/s for a breech baby are great candidates for VBAC.

If versions were so dangerous practioners wouldn't offer them or make referrals to those who specialize in them. In fact, external versions have become more widely used over the past 15 years or so based on their strong safety record and approximate 65% success rate. I can't imagine that a physician or midwife would refer a patient for a version if there was any question at all for that woman's personal safety or the safety of her baby. If a medical reason precludes attempting a version for a vaginal birth over a surgical one, I also imagine that would be explained in detail.

What a horrendous statement. Why on earth would you try and make this mother feel guilty for wanting to attempt a vaginal birth? Maybe her "previous choices" were what was best for her. Who are you to stand and make judgement?

Actually many private practice OBs do not offer ECV any longer. I know of two locally that do not. They do not have a 65% success rate either. Each doctor has their own success rate in turning, a percentage of those that do turn still end up as surgical births due to other complications: cord issues, distress, etc. So while there may be more than a 50% success rate in turning the baby, this doesn't me a vaginal birth will happen. Most EVCs are followed by induction.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pumpkinsmama* 
Quote removed by moderator.

Yes I support the choice of Cesarean just as I support a woman's right to homebirth or have a natural vaginal birth.


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

I have removed quite a few posts that were in violation of the MDC User Agreement. I will be contacting those of you who had a post removed shortly to further discuss.

A gentle but firm reminder:

Everyone please keep the MDC User Agreement in mind when posting.

It's important to remember that there are a variety of passionate perspectives surrounding these topics. You are free to disagree, but please be civil and respectful.

If a thread has too many User Agreement violations, it often cannot be returned to the board, and that would be a loss for those of us who are seeking the information in the future.

Please feel free to PM me if there are any questions, concerns or further comments about UA Violations









Thanks for your support and cooperation!


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

Mod hat off







:

Quote:

If versions were so dangerous practioners wouldn't offer them or make referrals to those who specialize in them.
I don't exactly see this as a valid reason why just because doctors either DO something or refer women to doctors who do makes them less dangerous though. I know a good number of allopathic practitioners in my area who practice some forms of non-evidence-based medicine that medical research has either shown to be potentially dangerous or of questionable benefit. Just because it's done doesn't mean it's "safe." I have a feeling we agree on this


----------



## ~member~ (May 23, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EviesMom* 
What would have happened if I went to the hospital but said "no" to the c-section or refused to sign the consent forms. Would they tell me they wouldn't let me birth there? Kick me out? Would I have been able to try for a vaginal birth? Has anybody done such a thing? What was the reaction and outcome? I'm curious!

I refused, they cut me open anyways and called CPS on me and tried to take my children from me. It was hell.
Yes, I contacted lawyers, posted about it on MDC, etc. Nothing ever happened.


----------



## megjo (May 21, 2006)

Quote:

I refused, they cut me open anyways and called CPS on me and tried to take my children from me. It was hell.
OH my word! I cannot believe that! Now, I was under the impression (since I used to work in L/D), that anyone can refuse ANYTHING. Of course they may try to convince you otherwise with manipulation, but if you do not sign the CONSENT for surgery, I don't believe they can do it. Now, that is my understanding. I remember a gal that refused a C/S when she really needed one. Since she refused, the doctor did not do the section but tried to assist her vaginally as best as she could. Unfortunately, the baby did not survive. The reason why I bring this up is to let you know that some (I can't speak for all) doctors do respect a patient's refusal.

I think everyone on this forum knows this: Everything has a risk. The freedom to acess those risks and make the best decision for you is the best way to go. Some of us would rather be in a hospital, some of us would rather stay at home, etc. We take the risks and take responsibility of the outcome. That's the beauty of being able to take control of our health.


----------



## rmzbm (Jul 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mavournin* 
What a horrendous statement. Why on earth would you try and make this mother feel guilty for wanting to attempt a vaginal birth? Maybe her "previous choices" were what was best for her. Who are you to stand and make judgement?

Thank you! OTF, that was SO not helpful.


----------



## EviesMom (Nov 30, 2004)

MITB How horrible!

I know ICAN, and I'm not pregnant but am talking to some different midwives etc. for down the road.

As for the version, well, I recall that at the time, I had intuition? the baby? something... telling me it didn't matter if I scheduled a version or not. And indeed, it didn't matter at all in the end. Risks and benefits of one are a matter for another thread, imo.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MamaInTheBoonies* 
I refused, they cut me open anyways and called CPS on me and tried to take my children from me. It was hell.
Yes, I contacted lawyers, posted about it on MDC, etc. Nothing ever happened.









Why didnt you just walk out?







:


----------



## homemademomma (Apr 1, 2004)

i dont know if this makes you feel better or not, but ime/imo a preterm breech baby is SAFER w/a c/s. in preterm babes thier heads are so much bigger than their butts and they run a real risk of head entrapment.


----------



## oregonbound (Jun 9, 2006)

I had a c-section with my first because she was breech. At the time, the midwife I was seeing (in a practice with OBs) said that if I had a "proven pelvis" (meaning that I had given birth vaginally before) they would have considered it, but that no doctor there would consider it for a first-time mom. They also didn't do versions because they did not feel that the benefits outweighed the risks. Looking back, I regret not doing more to try to have a vaginal birth, but, like another poster said, what's done is done. Technically, I think that doctors can be sued for battery if they do surgery on you without your consent, but the blanket consent form they make you sign pretty much covers them to do anything in case of "emergency." I don't think I would have shown up at the hospital and refused a c-section in any event because I would not have wanted to be in the care of someone who has never done a vaginal breech birth, which I imagine a lot of younger doctors probably haven't. The good news for us is that women with first c-sections for breech babies have the highest rate of successful VBACs as long as the second one is not breech, and I had a successful VBAC in April 2004, and am planning another one next February.

Cheers,
Minta
mom to 2 and one on the way...


----------



## InstinctiveMama (Sep 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
Actually many private practice OBs do not offer ECV any longer. I know of two locally that do not.

Consider that the OBs not offering external versions simply prefer c-sections. C-sections bring in more money, they can be scheduled and often women can be coerced into repeat c-sections.

I think the most important thing to take from this discussion is to choose a care provider carefully. Finding someone who shares your view of birth can make all the difference.


----------



## birthgreeter (Aug 31, 2006)

Mavournin said:


> There have been stories of women refusing cesareans and hospitals obtaining court orders to do them.
> 
> But, that said, if you are planning another pregnancy, I would find a VBAC-friendly provider and birth location and go for it. Get involved with ICAN now. In most cases women who had a previous c/s for a breech baby are great candidates for VBAC.
> 
> ...


----------



## khaoskat (May 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
The lone voice of dissent...

Be glad you were spared the version. They are dangerous. Crazy dangerous and you may have ended up with a csection anyway, an emergency one which would not have been cool.

I respectfully disagree about being spared a version. I have undergone one myself, after informed consent. I feel that a person has the right to choose, after being informed of the risks and benefits of a procedure, weather or not they choose to accept it. As you said, the worse outcome would be a c-section, but the poster was already going to end up being forced into a c-section because her child was breach.

My personal choice would be (and has always been) to attempt anything possible to prevent major surgery.

The most common problems with a version are 1) They can lead to fetal destress which could lead to a c-section; 2) that the version doesn't work and you will have to schedule a c-section; and 3) often times the babies turn back into breach.

Right now I am in the same boat, again, as the op. My midwife/OB's have done nothing and I am 40 weeks prego with a suspected breach. I also have a history of fast labor (usually under 2 hours from time of realizing I am in labor until delivery).

I fully understand where she is coming from. And I also understand questioning what happened at your birth after the fact.

As for weather or not they can force you - I have read that if you basically come in fully dialated ready to push that you are pretty much going to end up with a breach vaginal delivery. I don't know how true that is or not, but I may be one of those testing this theory. Right now, I think one good night of fun between DH and I and this baby would be here....

When you come into the hopsital you sign consent forms for treatment, one of such treatments includes a c-section if deemed medically necessary. If you are in early labor (ie not dialated beyond like a 4 or 5) and are in stable condition they can refuse to treat you. They actually do send parents home who are not in active labor.

But personally I would make them get a Court Order.


----------



## InstinctiveMama (Sep 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
Why didnt you just walk out?







:

It's easy to suggest in hindsight a woman should have walked out. Yet when a woman is in labor and her children are being threatened, it's a whole new ballgame.


----------



## Jilian (Jun 16, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *InstinctiveMama* 
It's easy to suggest in hindsight a woman should have walked out. Yet when a woman is in labor and her children are being threatened, it's a whole new ballgame.

I agree. Where would she have gone? We don't know how far along she was in her labor. Sometimes you just make the best of the situation and do what you can. I'm sorry to hear you were treated like that MITB


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *InstinctiveMama* 
Consider that the OBs not offering external versions simply prefer c-sections. C-sections bring in more money, they can be scheduled and often women can be coerced into repeat c-sections.

I think the most important thing to take from this discussion is to choose a care provider carefully. Finding someone who shares your view of birth can make all the difference.

I see a doctor who has no problems telling her patients her csection rate. Its over 30%. She's also one of a few doctors in town that will do VBACs and is pretty successful at it. She has a good bit of crunchy people seeing her for natural vaginal deliveries too, but she makes no bones about her csection rate and will give you the straight talk on why her rate is that high. (the majority of her csections are on repeats, multiples, and failed inductions) The thing is she did ECVs up until a few years ago, when she did one on a women who had 1)never had any uterine surgery 2)never had an abortion 3) had a healthy full term pregnancy and her uterus ruptures. She also said that the risks did not out weigh the benefits in her private practice. She said patients that were hell bent on them would be referred to a doctor who would and they would transfer there care. (this would be some of the same doctors who performed my own ECV that nearly killed me and my kid) My OB also does breech vaginal deliveries on women who have had previous vaginal births, but she makes it real clear that she does not do them on first time mothers.

ECVs also cost money. Two doctors are supposed to be present. Ultrasound technology is supposed to be used, and also medication that is normally given through IV (I had none), ECVs should be done in a hospital setting, and there is to be fetal monitoring before, and after the test. So its not like they are free.


----------



## lrlittle (Nov 11, 2005)

InstinctiveMama said:


> Consider that the OBs not offering external versions simply prefer c-sections. C-sections bring in more money, they can be scheduled and often women can be coerced into repeat c-sections. QUOTE]
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## AndreaBash (Feb 20, 2003)

Quote:

If versions were so dangerous practioners wouldn't offer them or make referrals to those who specialize in them.
Doesn't that also mean that if c-sections were so dangerous and never safer than the alternative that practitioners wouldn't offer them or make referrals for them?


----------



## khaoskat (May 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
I
ECVs also cost money. Two doctors are supposed to be present. Ultrasound technology is supposed to be used, and also medication that is normally given through IV (I had none), ECVs should be done in a hospital setting, and there is to be fetal monitoring before, and after the test. So its not like they are free.

I can tell you how much my ECV cost me....

OB Fee (single OB in the room, but had 1 nurse and like 4 nursing students). $400

US - they do this to see where the baby is located before and after the ECV is done. Included in hospital bill.

Medication - I had Mag. Sulfate for the one we actually did. I was scheduled for a second one, but DS turned on his own on way in to have it done...and they would have used Tribute. These are both the same medications that are used to stop pre-term labor, because they help relax the uterine muscles. These are the two drugs that are used. I have heard some say that they will offer pain relief (ie epidural, but never known anyone who actually had this offered). Included in hospital bill.

Fetal Monitoring - They do this for about 30 minutes prior to and for about2 hours after. Usually the procedure takes about 30 - 60 minutes from the time medications are started. I believe that I was on the Mag Sulfate for about 20-30 mins, but cannot remember exactly, because she was about to start the Mag Sulfate but the OB made her wait, because he was heading in to assist in a twin delivery that was happening "NOW" vaginally. So, he couldn't tell how long he would be in there assisting his other partner with the delivery. Once he came in and started the procedure (ie begining US to ending US) I think it took like 5-10 minutes. This was also included in hospital bill.

Food - I was allowed to eat immediately after the procedure was completed. The OB had them bring me a tray of food (actually said when I asked for it, since it made me a little nasueas, but that went away about 15 minutes later). I was also allowed to drink water and suck on ice chips prior to and after the procedure. Included in Hospital Bill.

Hospital Bill - $750 if I remember correctly. Whole time in hospital (took longer than normal because the administering of the Mag. Sul. had to be delayed due to OB assisting in another delivery) was about 4-5 hours.

I was released and able to go home the same day. The only time they dicussed inducing was when at 41 1/2 weeks, DS1 decided to go breech again. But like I said, he turned on the way in for the version, the OB double checked with a quick US and sent me home to wait for natural labor to start.


----------



## pampered_mom (Mar 27, 2006)

I just wanted to comment on a couple of things. First, you have the right to refuse whatever treatment you want to and they have absoutely no legal right to force you to do otherwise. There have been some court ordered c/s, but the courts have upheld a woman's right to refuse a c/s regardless of whether or not the doctors think it will put the baby in danger. Legal precedent is on your side.

Secondly, when you show up at a hospital in labor they cannot refuse to treat you - EMTLA says they can't.

It would be a good idea for every woman, pregnant or not, to make themselves familiar with their legal rights. There are a number of sites that do that and ICAN's is cerrtainly a good place to start. As is www.advocatesforpregnantwomen.org


----------



## Ahappymel (Nov 20, 2001)

Not my personal experience but...
My best friend was a homebirth-turned-hospital-transfer. Her labor took 7 days. The hospital wanted to do a c-section for CPD. Her baby never showed signs of distress...she was just taking a long time to labor. She refused c-section.
She faced severe criticism in the hospital. Immense harassment and resulting PTSD. Her baby was finally born vaginally. She has gone on to birth two more children vaginally and unassisted at home.
When she retrieved her hospital records, she found that the hospital staff's comments/notes were greatly altered from the actual circumstances.
So, yes...you can refuse any treatment...and it would be wise to be prepared to arm yourself for subsequent harassment.


----------



## InstinctiveMama (Sep 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
I see a doctor who has no problems telling her patients her csection rate. Its over 30%. She's also one of a few doctors in town that will do VBACs and is pretty successful at it. She has a good bit of crunchy people seeing her for natural vaginal deliveries too, but she makes no bones about her csection rate and will give you the straight talk on why her rate is that high. (the majority of her csections are on repeats, multiples, and failed inductions) The thing is she did ECVs up until a few years ago, when she did one on a women who had 1)never had any uterine surgery 2)never had an abortion 3) had a healthy full term pregnancy and her uterus ruptures. She also said that the risks did not out weigh the benefits in her private practice. She said patients that were hell bent on them would be referred to a doctor who would and they would transfer there care. (this would be some of the same doctors who performed my own ECV that nearly killed me and my kid) My OB also does breech vaginal deliveries on women who have had previous vaginal births, but she makes it real clear that she does not do them on first time mothers.

ECVs also cost money. Two doctors are supposed to be present. Ultrasound technology is supposed to be used, and also medication that is normally given through IV (I had none), ECVs should be done in a hospital setting, and there is to be fetal monitoring before, and after the test. So its not like they are free.

That is the information you have received from your doctor. Not all OBs/midwives have the same policies. It is difficult to make a blanket statement about versions based on one person's experience with one OB.

Versions in a hospital setting are not free. But neither is a c-section.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *InstinctiveMama* 
That is the information you have received from your doctor. Not all OBs/midwives have the same policies. It is difficult to make a blanket statement about versions based on one person's experience with one OB.

Versions in a hospital setting are not free. But neither is a c-section.

Do you think this is my ONE experience. O heck no! After having one in 1997, with not full information about the risks involved, that landed me in an OR with a ture emergency csection, that I felt for 75 minutes I decided to do a great amount of reading, research and reading on the subject. I found out that it was not uncommon to have a baby pass meconium during a version. Mine did. It is not uncommon for a baby to be bruised. My baby was bruised on one side of her buttocks and on her face and head. Not only was my baby bruised but so was I. My baby also went into serious distress, as did I, and my BP was all over the place. My only thoughts when I had my version was having a natural vaginal birth because I was so anti-csection, and so judgemental of others that had them, that I wasn't going to be one of those women.

I think you will find many midwives, ones that post here, that will strongly advise against ECV because of the risks. Maybe you should read about the risks, the perecentage of those babies that due turn that still end up as csections for various reasonsm and the risks to the mother and baby. In doing any research about ECV you will find that the proceedure was actually discontinued and advised against after fetal DEATH. I am sure the risks dont matter to some because its not affecting you. But I am sure for those few women who have uterine ruptures, placental abruption, cord prolapse or injury thats just alright, because its only a "low" risk right?


----------



## GalateaDunkel (Jul 22, 2005)

Oh come on OnTheFence, don't you know that absolutely _any_ negative outcome is infinitely preferable to the shame of Cesarean? [/sarcasm]

It's tiring trying to pierce the veil of denial and ideology....if you go through the archives here you can even find posts claiming that midwives can somehow magically get a baby around a full previa...whatever the problem is, you name it........ANYTHING BUT C/S!!

And I must say I find it positively Orwellian that telling a mom that her c/s may have been the best thing at the time is considered _un_supportive.


----------



## Brayg (Jun 18, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mavournin* 

If versions were so dangerous practioners wouldn't offer them or make referrals to those who specialize in them.

If *vaccines* were so dangerous, practicioners wouldn't offer them, right? Or *circumcision*? Or *gasp* C-sections themselves? Right?


----------



## ~member~ (May 23, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
Why didnt you just walk out?







:

And go where? I was in full labor. I asked to be transfered to another hospital, and they told me they had police officers waiting to arrest me if I tried to leave AMA.







: The nearest hospital was a 3 1/2 hour drive.


----------



## ~member~ (May 23, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jilian* 
I agree. Where would she have gone? We don't know how far along she was in her labor. Sometimes you just make the best of the situation and do what you can. I'm sorry to hear you were treated like that MITB









Thank you, Jilian.


----------



## khaoskat (May 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
After having one in 1997, with not full information about the risks involved, that landed me in an OR with a ture emergency csection,

I found out that it was not uncommon to have a baby pass meconium during a version. Mine did.

First off - your horrible version experience was almost 10 years ago. Technology, practices and medical advancements have been significantly made in that 10 years. So, what may have happened 10 years ago, probably would be a different outcome today.

The reason they give you the Meds (Mag or Trib) is to relax your uterus so that the OB is not fighting your body to turn the baby. With the uterus more relaxed, the OB is not having to push so hard to turn the baby.

Second off - how do you know that the baby passed the meconium during the version. No one knows, scientifically, what causes a baby to pass meconium while in uteru. It is a common belief that the baby does it when under some form of stress, but that is not always the case. Neither of my children were ever in any type of stress or distress, but they both had passed meconium while in utero. So, unless we have a video camera with color picture inplanted inside us when we are pregnant, we will never know exactly what causes a baby to pass meconium.

Third - most midwife's don't recommend ECV's because it is a medical procedure. Most midwife's attempt non-medical or homeopathic/naturopathic methods of doing stuff prior to turning to the "medical" model. Most midwife's only resort to the "medical" model as a last resort.

Lastly, every person's experience is different. I had a wonderful ECV, by a very gentle, loving and caring OB. I have no clue what his c-section rate was (or that of his practice) as I saw their Midwife through most of my pregnancy. I went to this OB on the high recommendations of many people - my family DR, two of my fellow employees who use him (this was with my first child, they no longer have the Midwife in their office, so I switched to a different practice that does). They have also tended to go more towards high risk vs low risk pregnancies because of their knowledge, expereince, and directions that they want to take. Heck, he is one of the only OB's I know who will work with a mother who is 42 weeks and let her go up to 43 weeks. His kids were all 44 weekers, but his fellow partners are not comfortable with going much beyond 42 weeks.

When I had him do my version, he stopped 1/2 way through turning the baby, because I suddenly just started holding my breath. He wanted to make sure I was alright. I had held my breath because I got the urge to puke, and didn't want to do that. Then, when I was feeling better, he continued on with the procedure, reminding me to breather. After he was finished he made all the nurses (1 full and 4 students) get me lots of pillows, a food tray (since he knew I hadn't eaten all day), and even made sure they had plenty of water for me.

When I went in for them to try to ripen my cervix at 41 weeks, he knew I didn't want to be tied down to a bed, so he made darn sure that his orders included "ambulatory with mobile telementry unit immediately". With Cervadil, I believe I had to stay laying down for an hour or two, to ensure that it didn't slip out. But once that time was over, he wanted me up and walking. This really pissed off many of the nurses, because I wasn't readily available to them. I was also going to be discharged after 1 dose....even though the nurses kept telling me otherwise. After the 12 hour time period of having it inserted, it was removed, and the nurse was put into her place when she tried to hand him the next round of the meds. I was monitored for about 1 more hour, because I was having regular and strong contractions, then sent home.

He really was working with me, so I could avoid a c-section, so I could do a natural (non medicated) labor and delivery.

I think most of the OB's around here either do external versions, have a partner in their office that does them (2 out of the 3 OB's in this group did them), or there is a perinatologist group that does them that women are referred to.

I am not sure if my current practice's OB's do them (I am with the Midwife's, but their supervising physicians are the local Med School Teachers) or not. I think they might, so that they can be taught.

Everyone has a different opinion, and I for one, would attempt another version or do almost whatever it takes to turn a breech baby vs doing a c-section. Because at that point, my choices are just go for a c-section or attempt to do a vaginal delivery and worse case scenario end up with a c-section.

BTW - I was reviewing a thread on another message board I am on, where people were comparing the prices of their pregnancies. The average cost of a c-section (including hospital, ana, and OB) was around $30,000 - $50,000. Vaginal Delivery varried upon how long you stayed in the hospital, but was around $5,000-$10,000.


----------



## khaoskat (May 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MamaInTheBoonies* 
And go where? I was in full labor. I asked to be transfered to another hospital, and they told me they had police officers waiting to arrest me if I tried to leave AMA.







: The nearest hospital was a 3 1/2 hour drive.









I am sorry you had such a horrible experience. Hospital staff really know how to get to people (even the most intelligent, knowledge people who know their rights). Women do not always remember our WITS while we are in labor and delivery.

Trust me, even though I am an attorney and know my rights, with DS1, I let them push a lot of unwanted stuff on me, because of their threats, or the fact that t hey caught me when I was 99% asleep (and so was my couch). They know when to push women (and their couches) to get what they want. Even having a well written birth plan is not a guarentee you will get your way, because they do not like them. The hospital nurses DO NOT like women who buck the norm (ie if the norm in the hospital is walk in, go to triage, labor for a couple hours and call for an epidural around 3-4 CM, anyone else bucks the norm and makes their job 100 xs harder).

Three of the worst threats that can be made: 1) We will have you arrested you if leave AMA; 2) We will call Children's Services if you do not do what we tell you to do, because you are harming your child; 3) We will get the Court to Order that you must submit to what we do...they claim to have the Judge's private numbers and able to reach them 24/7 to get their way.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GalateaDunkel* 
Oh come on OnTheFence, don't you know that absolutely _any_ negative outcome is infinitely preferable to the shame of Cesarean? [/sarcasm]

It's tiring trying to pierce the veil of denial and ideology....if you go through the archives here you can even find posts claiming that midwives can somehow magically get a baby around a full previa...whatever the problem is, you name it........ANYTHING BUT C/S!!

And I must say I find it positively Orwellian that telling a mom that her c/s may have been the best thing at the time is considered _un_supportive.

I've read those posts because I have been here for a very long time. (I had another user ID before this one) The thing is, I don't believe them.







:


----------



## ericswifey27 (Feb 12, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *coloradoalice* 
If the doctors knew baby was breech I don't think it would have mattered if you signed consent or not. At some point they would have decided that it was an emergent situation and that the baby needed to be delivered. If they had policy against breech you were probably stuck. They can give you a c-section at almost any point in the birth, so they probably would have just waited til you were beyond being able to say no, and then done it. *The majority or hospitals won't do vaginal breech. And in some states midwives are not allowd to do them at home. It's just one of those very unfortunate things*.


Sad but true.

That wasn't always the case. My mom birthed my twin sister and I vaginally, 1 month+ premature and I was BREECH. That was in 1976.

Sigh.







:


----------



## Maggi315 (Aug 31, 2003)

Well, just a quick reply...nak...but refusing a c/s can end you in trouble with cps, the law, and give you postpartum depression and post traumatic stress disorder. Labor is not the time for lots of negative vibes/pressure/threats, etc.

We have an example around here of a woman who wouldn't consent after being brought in by her midwife for failure to progress, doctor walked out, wouldn't take her on as patient, woman was transported to another hospital by ambulance after midwife called around trying to find someone to help her.

So, while in theory, you can refuse any procedure, it can be made very difficult for you. And miserable and sometimes downright dangerous.

About versions...we do them a bit different and try all kinds of alternative methods too. We are gentle and if baby doesn't want to turn, we don't force baby. If all else fails, we deliver the baby breech. And have a good success rate.

OK, this isn't such a quick response. Having said all of the above, I don't think that c/s are the absolute evil and sometimes do exactly what they are designed for: to save lives!

But if you truly don't want a c/s, then you must do whatever it takes to seek out a supportive midwife, or if you can find one, doc. Maybe even going out of state, travelling, etc.

So, there's my lengthy two cents. I hate to see people going into labor with a "fight" mentality and ready for controversary or argument, just doesn'tmake agood laboring environment for mom or baby.


----------



## SundayInSeptember (Aug 25, 2006)

_Three of the worst threats that can be made: 1) We will have you arrested you if leave AMA; 2) We will call Children's Services if you do not do what we tell you to do, because you are harming your child; 3) We will get the Court to Order that you must submit to what we do...they claim to have the Judge's private numbers and able to reach them 24/7 to get their way._

Obviously, I can't speak about all hospitals, but I know for a fact our local hospital does, in fact, have the judge's private numbers on speed dial. Indeed, they do routinely get court orders for whatever they want, and they are rather smug about it, I might add. I know this from a very reliable source.


----------



## Synchro246 (Aug 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pamered_mom* 
I just wanted to comment on a couple of things. First, you have the right to refuse whatever treatment you want to and they have absoutely no legal right to force you to do otherwise. There have been some court ordered c/s, but the courts have upheld a woman's right to refuse a c/s regardless of whether or not the doctors think it will put the baby in danger. Legal precedent is on your side.

]

The only thing that they can do something KNOWING that later they are going to have to pay, but it isn't going to stop them.

On the version vs. cesarean thing. I don't know much of the statistics myself. I wouldn't be suprised if version is statistically more risky than a cesarean. But I believe one thing. HCPs should know how to vaginally deliver breech babies instead of making women make a choice like that. I would never ask someone who doesn't know how to deliver a breech vaginally to do it for me. I would probably go unassisted or fly my happy butt to The Farm for a few weeks. But, hey, that's just me.


----------



## djinneyah (Sep 4, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
"BTW - I was reviewing a thread on another message board I am on, where people were comparing the prices of their pregnancies. The average cost of a c-section (including hospital, ana, and OB) was around $30,000 - $50,000. Vaginal Delivery varried upon how long you stayed in the hospital, but was around $5,000-$10,000."

LMAO. I frankly find this FUNNY and don't believe it for one moment. My emergency csection was nearly $20,000 and I was in the OR for 75 minutes (highly unusual) and nearly died. I can tell you right now that my past two csections, INCLUDING my prenatal care and ultrasounds was less than $10K.
A friend of mine who was at a high risk hospital with HELLP syndrome who had a csection with GA was not even 15K last year. I sure would like to see some REAL factual information, and surely there is some online that says a surgical birth with a spinal or epidural was 5OK.

just randomly jumping in here to say...she DID say average, not "every single case across the board"..

her figures are correct..look them up.

back to your regularly scheduled debate


----------



## khaoskat (May 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 

I believe I know, since there was no stress at all until that moment. My baby had significant distress, bruising, etc.

LMAO. I frankly find this FUNNY and don't believe it for one moment. My emergency csection was nearly $20,000 and I was in the OR for 75 minutes (highly unusual) and nearly died.

Again, neither of my children had any stressors in the pregnancy. Both were low risk pregnancies. And BOTH of my children were born with meconium. Today meconium is not as "big of a deal" as it used to be. Baby's are routinely suctioned out after birth to clear the airways of any and all material (be it amniotic fluid or meconium). Neither of my children suffered any side effects from the meconium.

I know for a birth center birth, with aprx. 29 hour stay after delivery (baby born at 4 am. and I left next day at 9 a.m).... Midwife $2,200. Hospital/birth center - apx. $3,700; Baby's charges - $1,500.

I know someone who is paying 100% out of pocket for her birth (OB, Hospital, Ana, etc). They are look for just a vaginal delivery at around $10,000 out of pocket.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *khaoskat* 
Again, neither of my children had any stressors in the pregnancy. Both were low risk pregnancies. And BOTH of my children were born with meconium. Today meconium is not as "big of a deal" as it used to be. Baby's are routinely suctioned out after birth to clear the airways of any and all material (be it amniotic fluid or meconium). Neither of my children suffered any side effects from the meconium.

I know for a birth center birth, with aprx. 29 hour stay after delivery (baby born at 4 am. and I left next day at 9 a.m).... Midwife $2,200. Hospital/birth center - apx. $3,700; Baby's charges - $1,500.

I know someone who is paying 100% out of pocket for her birth (OB, Hospital, Ana, etc). They are look for just a vaginal delivery at around $10,000 out of pocket.

They are getting ripped off then. That or its really cheap (seriously doubt) here.

Note that none of my other children born by csection passed any meconium at all. None. The only one that did was the one that was severely bruised and manipulated.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

average cesarean cost in the Us per childbirth.org $7186 1989
average cesarean cost in the Us per womensenews.org in 2005 $11361

here is the average cost for 2001-2002 in Texas Hospitals:
Amarillo; 2 hospitals. C-Section rates 19-23% Avg 21.3% Avg cost; $8,500.

Austin; 7 hospitals. C-Section rates 19-27% Avg 23.4% Avg cost; $7,000.

Beaumont; 7 Hospitals. C-Section rates 26-48% Avg 36.6% Avg cost; $11,700. (Jefferson Co.)

Corpus Christi; 7 Hospitals. C-Section rates 25-37% Avg 33.5% Avg cost; $10,000 (Nueces Co.)

Dallas Ft. Worth; 44 Hospitals. C-Section rates 17-35% Avg 26.6% Avg cost; $8,000

El Paso; 5 Hospitals. C-Section rates 23-37% Avg. 32.6%. Avg cost; $14,000.

Houston; 39 Hospitals. C-Section rates 14-37% Avg. 27.9% Avg cost; $9,000

Longview; 5 Hospitals. C-Section rates 23-35% Avg 27.9% Avg cost; $11,000

Lubbock; 3 Hospitals. C-Section rates 22-39% Avg 31% Avg cost; $7,600

Midland-Odessa; 4 Hospitals. C-Section rates 19-27% Avg 24.45% Avg cost; $6,750

Rio Grande Valley; 8 Hospitals. C-Section rates 27-47% Avg 36.1% Avg cost; $10,800 (Starr and Hidalgo Co.)

San Antonio; 13 hospitals. C-Section rates 15-32% Avg 27.1% Avg cost; $6,700

Victoria; 2 Hospitals. C-Section rates 30-36% Avg 33% Avg cost; $7,500

Waco Temple; 5 Hospitals. C-Section rates 18-27% Avg 24.7% Avg cost; $7,600

Witchita Falls; 1 hospital. C-Section rate 28% Cost; $6,000

And you may find this interesting to add to the book of knowledge about the COST of elective surgical births: http://pt.wkhealth.com/pt/re/ajog/ab...856144!8091!-1

"Results: The average cost of an attempted vaginal delivery without oxytocin (Pitocin) or epidural anesthesia was 15.1% lower in nulliparous women and 20% lower in multiparous women than with elective cesarean delivery. However, in nulliparous women, the addition of Pitocin nullified any cost differences; if epidural anesthesia was also used, total costs exceeded the cost of elective cesarean delivery by almost 10%. The cost of a failed attempt at vaginal delivery was much higher than elective cesarean delivery for both groups. The average cost for all women who attempted vaginal delivery was only 0.2% less than the per-patient cost of elective cesarean delivery.

Conclusion: The adoption of a policy of cesarean delivery on demand should have little impact on the overall cost of obstetric care."

So can someone provide me with the proof of those $30K-50K csections?


----------



## pampered_mom (Mar 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
average cesarean cost in the Us per childbirth.org $7186 1989
average cesarean cost in the Us per womensenews.org in 2005 $11361

Are the charges your listing including all the carges or just part of them? Something definitely seems a little off there. My c/s was in the mid $20k range. It was an "elective" scheduled cesarean and not in the least bit an emergency or a rush.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Synchro246*
The only thing that they can do something KNOWING that later they are going to have to pay, but it isn't going to stop them.

No one ever said the cost of standing up for your rights was an easy one...history shows it never has been.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Maggi315*
So, while in theory, you can refuse any procedure, it can be made very difficult for you. And miserable and sometimes downright dangerous.

Still doesn't mean that you should consent to whatever procedure they want to do just to avoid difficulty or "danger".

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SundayinSeptember*
Obviously, I can't speak about all hospitals, but I know for a fact our local hospital does, in fact, have the judge's private numbers on speed dial. Indeed, they do routinely get court orders for whatever they want, and they are rather smug about it, I might add. I know this from a very reliable source.

Sad that this is ever consider something that is a good SOP... Reprehensible that we treat pregnant women like criminals, invalids, or just disposable vessels to grow babies. Again www.advocatesforpregnantwomen.org is a good resource to have bookmarked.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GalateaDunkel*
Oh come on OnTheFence, don't you know that absolutely any negative outcome is infinitely preferable to the shame of Cesarean?

Is the converse true? Any cesarean is preferable in order to avoid the potential negative outcomes? In my case I would have rather had all the information I needed to give real informed consent and chose the potentially risky option than be duped into making the "safer" choice.

FWIW - I don't find my cesarean "shameful", but that doesn't minimize the feelings of remourse and loss that I have as a result.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GalateaDunkel*
And I must say I find it positively Orwellian that telling a mom that her c/s may have been the best thing at the time is considered unsupportive.

I guess that depends on whether or not you are dismissing her feelings of loss or remorse about her experience. It would also depend on whether or not you were trying to minimize her experience. In those cases then yes, it would be unsupportive.


----------



## spyder (Aug 6, 2006)

I saw it mentioned a couple of times that women who have had a c/s for a breech has one of the best chances for a successful vbac. Anyone know where this data is coming from? I'd like to read more on it.


----------



## djinneyah (Sep 4, 2004)

my mistake...i thought we were talking about emergent c-sections, which can be upwards of $30,000...

i'll bow out now...


----------



## mamaverdi (Apr 5, 2005)

Anyone who has received a hospital bill, even when you have insurance, gets fees from everyone: the hospital, the anesthesiologist, the surgeon...

Plus, paying out of pocket usually means paying much much much more than someone pays with insurance.

Friends here in Houston have paid with insurance around $15K for c-sections..all totaled. None of which were emergent.

Also, out of pocket per person varies so much from plan to plan, company to company, state to state.

The insurance system in the US is a form of social violence. Just like having judges' phone numbers on speed dial to get whatever they want.


----------



## Synchro246 (Aug 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaverdi* 

Plus, paying out of pocket usually means paying much much much more than someone pays with insurance.

Also, out of pocket per person varies so much from plan to plan, company to company, state to state.

.

I disagree with your first sentence. IME most medical care providers will give out of pocket people a lower rate than what they charge the insurance companies. They also almost always charge the insurance companies more than the company is going to pay.

I don't really understand your second sentence there.


----------



## Synchro246 (Aug 8, 2005)

pampered mom- all I was saying that even if a woman does not consent that doesn't mean that she will avoid the procedure. If it's really important to her to avoid a procedure she might be better off not going to the hospital at all. Hopefully there isn't care tfrom which she *would* benefit because then she's in between a rock and a hard place.


----------



## boscopup (Jul 15, 2005)

Alot (maybe all?) of the cities posted in OnTheFence's C-section cost post were in TX, where I believe the cost of living, and thus the cost of hospital procedures, is lower than some areas (like California and many of the northeast states). I also notice that OTF is located in AL, which also has a low cost of living (I'm in AL too). My vaginal birth and 5 day hospital stay (PPROM at 29 weeks, kept me pregnant in the antepartum unit for 4 days and then "let" me deliver naturally after pumping me up with steroids) was less than $10k, but I have a friend who had to pay out of pocket for her hospital birth in VA, and she was quoted $10-12k for a non-complicated vaginal birth (normal 2 day stay). So she had to pay more than I did for a pregnancy complication involved birth with a longer hospital stay. It's just a difference in what part of the country you're in. So yes, I could see that some emergency C-sections might cost $30k+. I wouldn't expect it to happen here in AL though, because our cost of living is alot lower than some parts of the country.

(note that my cost posted above does NOT include cost of baby care... that's a separate NICU bill, and was much, much higher!)


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pamered_mom* 
Are the charges your listing including all the carges or just part of them? Something definitely seems a little off there. My c/s was in the mid $20k range. It was an "elective" scheduled cesarean and not in the least bit an emergency or a rush.

I guess that depends on whether or not you are dismissing her feelings of loss or remorse about her experience. It would also depend on whether or not you were trying to minimize her experience. In those cases then yes, it would be unsupportive.

I am going to address the two comments above. From my understanding, it would include all charges. My emergency csection was nearly 75 minutes and was very expensive. One of the reasons for this was the amount of drugs I received in the OR and out. I was kicked out of the hospital 3 days later. My stay in the hospital was included in that fee as well, as was the anest, food, the whole nine yards. I think the variations on some would be the amount of medication given, blood, etc.

The OP of this thread asked a what if question? What I really wanted to say was "what if" you did refuse and your baby died or was injured? what if you refused and you had a prolapse cord due to breech presentation? WHAT IF? She made healthcare choices PRIOR to entering that hospital, she had a health, live baby, and she made a decision based on the information she had THEN. There should be no dwelling on WHAT IF she had refused, because frankly, she didn't. What the OP needs to do is learn from her experience, see the positive and negative in it, and MOVE ON (o yes, the dreaded move on comment). When you know better, you do better. So yes in many ways my comments were meant to support her, not to keep sending her down a spirally tube of how awful cesarean birth for a breech baby is.

Kim


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spyder* 
I saw it mentioned a couple of times that women who have had a c/s for a breech has one of the best chances for a successful vbac. Anyone know where this data is coming from? I'd like to read more on it.

Actually this is true. I believe this info can be found on ICAN.


----------



## Mavournin (Jul 9, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Synchro246* 
I disagree with your first sentence. IME most medical care providers will give out of pocket people a lower rate than what they charge the insurance companies. They also almost always charge the insurance companies more than the company is going to pay.

You are half right. Doctors and hospitals do charge the insurance companies much more than they are willing to pay. They do this because every insurance co. has it's own fee schedule and therefore reimbursement varies. But you are naive if you think medical care providers give patients who must pay out of pocket lower rates. As long as a provider is in network, or participating, they are required by law to accept an insurance co.'s payment as full. Even if it is a mere fraction of what the "fee" was. But if they are not participating, then tough noogies for the patient. This why tens of thousands of people file bankruptcy every year for medical bills alone.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *boscopup* 
Alot (maybe all?) of the cities posted in OnTheFence's C-section cost post were in TX, where I believe the cost of living, and thus the cost of hospital procedures, is lower than some areas (like California and many of the northeast states). I also notice that OTF is located in AL, which also has a low cost of living (I'm in AL too). My vaginal birth and 5 day hospital stay (PPROM at 29 weeks, kept me pregnant in the antepartum unit for 4 days and then "let" me deliver naturally after pumping me up with steroids) was less than $10k, but I have a friend who had to pay out of pocket for her hospital birth in VA, and she was quoted $10-12k for a non-complicated vaginal birth (normal 2 day stay). So she had to pay more than I did for a pregnancy complication involved birth with a longer hospital stay. It's just a difference in what part of the country you're in. So yes, I could see that some emergency C-sections might cost $30k+. I wouldn't expect it to happen here in AL though, because our cost of living is alot lower than some parts of the country.

(note that my cost posted above does NOT include cost of baby care... that's a separate NICU bill, and was much, much higher!)

Did you see the first TWO lines of my post?
My son's birthmother had a csection for eclampsia, yes I saw the bill, in Arizona. The cost of living there was more than 5X what ours is here in AL. Her csection, that include Mag, pre-op and post op drugs, blood, and various other things was only a littler over $13000 in 2000.


----------



## Mavournin (Jul 9, 2002)

It's not that unreasonable to see routine cesareans costing upwards of $20,000-30,000. The hospital I work for, a university medical center (ivy league) in an upscale neighborhood in the northeast, charges for c/s are through the roof. A vaginal delivery costs roughly $10,000 - $15,000 with an OB. Even homebirth midwives in my area are $6,000.

Now again, those are what the charges are. What insurance companies actually pay is a different story.

And OTF - 75 minutes for a cesarean might not be that unsual. In an elective c/s it is usually 15 minutes to deliver the baby and another 45-60 minutes to finish the surgery and close. True emergency c/s do have the baby out faster, but the work afterwards still takes a long time. It's not like a cesarean is an in and out procedure.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *khaoskat* 

Let's see - at the hospital room and board are expensive and are per day. A c-section delivery for a mother has a twice as long post partum stay as a C-Section delivery; C-Section delivery also has more meds (and generally stronger meds) and more medical procedures done on the mother (Catheter that must stay in for a specific period of time post partum) whereas even with an epidural they just do a quick cath if/when needed by a nurse and no post partum cath requirements.

You are wrong on several accounts. Women who have inductions with PIT the cost is about the same, also women with epidurals, there is not much difference in the meds either. In my last two csections I had no pre-op drugs, I had only an epidural for my surgery and one small dose of pit for helping the uterus contract down, and I was given ONE drug post op for blood pressure. No phenegran, no zofran, no drugs given during the suturing stage, no drugs for pain post op either. My aunt who had a vaginal birth, had Pit, phenegran with demerol, and an epidural before delivery. After delivery she had phenegran with demerol and far more pain medication than I did with my past two csections. Her birth was as expensive as mine and we had our babies 2 weeks apart.
Also many mothers, even those who have vaginal deliveries, (even natural ones) require catherization. I wasnt charged by the HOUR for mine. It was listed as a one time charge and came out 17 hours later. I had an IV, but other than that I didn't have any other "proceedures" done to me. My fetal monitoring was only like 1 hour long before surgery. I also staying in the hospital less than 48 hours. While insurance will pay for up to 96 hours post partum for a csection, many women do not stay the full time.
Women who have any form of induction usually incur nearly the same cost if NOT MORE cost than women who have cesarean births. They use far more drugs, have far more proceedures, have longer fetal monitoring, have their epidurals often for longer periods of time that require redosing at a high interval than a cesarean section mom, and often need more drugs to help them relax, deal with anxiety, nausea and vomiting, and the list goes on. Plus hours of Pit isnt cheap.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mavournin* 
And OTF - 75 minutes for a cesarean might not be that unsual. In an elective c/s it is usually 15 minutes to deliver the baby and another 45-60 minutes to finish the surgery and close. True emergency c/s do have the baby out faster, but the work afterwards still takes a long time. It's not like a cesarean is an in and out procedure.

The average time for a cesarean birth should be 30-45 minutes. I have had TWO elective, repeat c/s -- the 2nd one was 30 minutes and that was because I had my first scar and all the adhesions removed, my 3rd was 20 minutes from first cut to closure. So yes, they are in and out, unless someone isnt doing their job right. My sister was an L&D nurse and she said the average at their teaching hospital was like 45min. I also wasn't stapled up, had I been, it would have been even faster. My anest. is also my neighbor, he says my doctors average is 20 minutes, he said most the other Obs are about 30 minutes unless there is a complication. I personally don't see how in an elective csection the average is 15 minutes -- hell even on a baby story and birth day they get them out quicker than that.


----------



## InstinctiveMama (Sep 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GalateaDunkel* 
Oh come on OnTheFence, don't you know that absolutely _any_ negative outcome is infinitely preferable to the shame of Cesarean? [/sarcasm]

And I must say I find it positively Orwellian that telling a mom that her c/s may have been the best thing at the time is considered _un_supportive.

*No one has the right to qualify another mother's birth for her.*

This thread has stopped being about sharing information but is instead about trying to one up each other. I would rather not discuss serious issues with people conversing is a sarcastic and mean-spirited manner.


----------



## Mavournin (Jul 9, 2002)

Yeah and _A Baby Story_ doesn't have the benefit of editing for time. Puh-lease. Next time use a better reference than cheesy television.

Your experience may be different. But I'm going by published stats. And frankly, if I was that physician, I don't think I'd be running around bragging about my 20 minute open-to-close average for a c/s. I'd rather pick a physican with a steady and reliable hand than one who aims to be as quick as possible.


----------



## maxmama (May 5, 2006)

I've worked L&D for five years. In that time, I can tell you quite honestly that the less than one-hour section is an anomaly. There's just not a a rush, and, frankly, I'd rather the surgeon took his sweet-ass time doing the repair.

Also, just FYI, OR charges start when the patient enters the OR (usually well-ahead of the surgeon) and end when the PATIENT leaves the OR (not the surgeon). If we're going to be nit-picky, that adds a good 20 minutes onto most official surgery times.

Why are we arguing over the cost of c-sections, anyway? Mine was $75K, when you count a two-week antepartum stay. So what? Does that change anything about it? Do I wish any less I hadn't had it?

Also, the costs for an induction are pretty much all nursing costs (pit is dirt-cheap, as is miso. Even cervidil only costs around $200.) Hospitals cannot bill for nursing care inpatient. So the room cost is the only difference, and since few hospitals will "let" an induction last more than a day or two, it's clearly not the equivalent of a section.


----------



## SleeplessMommy (Jul 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
average cesarean cost in the Us per childbirth.org $7186 1989
average cesarean cost in the Us per womensenews.org in 2005 $11361

here is the average cost for 2001-2002 in Texas Hospitals:
Amarillo; 2 hospitals. C-Section rates 19-23% Avg 21.3% Avg cost; $8,500.

Austin; 7 hospitals. C-Section rates 19-27% Avg 23.4% Avg cost; $7,000.

.......

Medical care costs are much higher in the Northeast USA.

Philadelphia PA (major suburban hospital) :
1 vaginal delivery, no epidural, no pitocin: $15,000 + $3000 for doctor
1 c-section, $34,000 [a friend of sleeplessMommy]

These prices were 2002-2003. Should be higher now!


----------



## egoldber (Nov 18, 2002)

I had an emergency C-section under GA last year (preceded by 2 hours in the hospital prior to that, but no epidural or other drugs used) with a 4 day hospital stay and the cost was about $15,000.

The OB's fee was about $2500. I think the anesthesiology fee was about $2000. I'm sure there were probably a few other random fees that I have forgotten.

The REAL kicker fees were my DD's 9 days in the NICU though. I think they were close to $50,000. You have to love an itemized bill with the line item "fetal resuscitation = $900".







:

FYI, this was at a major teaching hospital outside Washington DC in an affluent Northern VA suburb.


----------



## pampered_mom (Mar 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
What the OP needs to do is learn from her experience, see the positive and negative in it, and MOVE ON (o yes, the dreaded move on comment). When you know better, you do better. So yes in many ways my comments were meant to support her, not to keep sending her down a spirally tube of how awful cesarean birth for a breech baby is.

See...that's the thing...you don't have the right to tell another person to move on. Each person works through their own issues at their own pace and in their own time. If you don't want to talk about the "what ifs" or listen to her as she discusses her regrets or feelings then you don't have to come and post in the thread. IMO it's rather calloused and _un_supportive to do otherwise.


----------



## pumpkinsmama (Aug 20, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
Women who have any form of induction usually incur nearly the same cost if NOT MORE cost than women who have cesarean births. They use far more drugs, have far more proceedures, have longer fetal monitoring, have their epidurals often for longer periods of time that require redosing at a high interval than a cesarean section mom, and often need more drugs to help them relax, deal with anxiety, nausea and vomiting, and the list goes on. Plus hours of Pit isnt cheap.


Not the moms who manage natural induction. There have been a few success stories by moms here recently. Foley catheters and breast pumps worked for one mom. I'm not saying it would work for everyone, but there are options to try.


----------



## MomSquared (Sep 21, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
The OP of this thread asked a what if question? What I really wanted to say was "what if" you did refuse and your baby died or was injured? what if you refused and you had a prolapse cord due to breech presentation? WHAT IF? She made healthcare choices PRIOR to entering that hospital, she had a health, live baby, and she made a decision based on the information she had THEN. There should be no dwelling on WHAT IF she had refused, because frankly, she didn't. What the OP needs to do is learn from her experience, see the positive and negative in it, and MOVE ON (o yes, the dreaded move on comment). When you know better, you do better. So yes in many ways my comments were meant to support her, not to keep sending her down a spirally tube of how awful cesarean birth for a breech baby is.

Kim

Say what you mean....mean what you say.


----------



## InstinctiveMama (Sep 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence* 
Quoted a post removed by moderator

ACOG can hardly be considered an unbiased source for information on c-sections, vbac, etc. PubMed (www.pubmed.gov), the Childbirth Connection (www.childbirthconnection.com) and the World Health Organization (http://www.who.int/en/) are three organizations who have no biased interest in presenting information.


----------



## crunchymomof2 (May 23, 2005)

I would be cautious about who I let do a breech vaginal birth. I think it could be dangerous to refuse a c/s and end up with a Dr who doesnt know how to deliver breech babies.


----------



## Synchro246 (Aug 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mavournin* 
You are half right. Doctors and hospitals do charge the insurance companies much more than they are willing to pay. They do this because every insurance co. has it's own fee schedule and therefore reimbursement varies. But you are naive if you think medical care providers give patients who must pay out of pocket lower rates.

In my experience - when I have talked with the doctors before services were rendered- they have given me prices at or below the "reasonable and customary". I have had some doctors say they don't do it, and I don't use their services unless they are worth the extra cost.


----------



## Ekatherina (Sep 20, 2004)

maybe a little different, but after two days of labor at home i was transfered to the hospital. ds was in some weird position and doctor (very rude and hateful one) wanted to do s/c right away. i begged like really begged him not to. kind of "please please please wait a little longer i can do it by myself!" they were touched i think by my determination after two days of pain. so they let me..............another 12 hours







.....then wanted to start pitocin when contractions suddenly stopped and i went again like "please please please







" i think they were shocked at this point. i birthed my son with no contractions, just pushing him out by myself. but im so proud i did. they said later to me, they never saw a birth like that.







:


----------



## Synchro246 (Aug 8, 2005)

Wow! That's impressive.

I do belive that refusing medical care and having that respected has a lot to do with the unique interactions that occur between the patient and the care givers. I think w a doc may "let" a woman avoid certain procedures, but really be agressive with another woman depending on how the doctor preceives the woman's knowlege and motives.


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

I have removed several posts that were in violation of the MDC User Agreement.

If you see any posts that you feel are inappropriate, please report them (the red, white and black triangular icon in the lower lefthand corner of the post) to a moderator immediately rather than responding to them on the thread itself.

Please also re-read the original post so that we can remain on-topic and keep this from being personal. Sarcasm does little to further productive discussion. Let's each do our part to keep this discussion on the board by maintaining an atmosphere of support rather than one of pointed criticism. No matter what your opinion









Thanks


----------

