The crux of the argument lies in two new studies by the HRP (a program of research within the WHO), which found that when caesarean section rates rise towards 10 per cent across a population, the number of maternal and newborn deaths decreases. Yet, when the rate goes above 10 per cent, there is no evidence that mortality rates improve. Furthermore, as with any surgical procedure, there are risks. Specifically, caesareans increases the risk of a baby ending up in intensive care, and hold serious possible side-effects for mothers, who will stay longer in hospital, and are more likely to have a hysterectomy or a cardiac arrest. Yet, confusingly perhaps, in its 2011 guidelines, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) states that women who want a caesarean should get one, even if it is not for medical reasons.
The fact that the number of C-sections has grown so quickly in Britain supports the argument that as a nation, we are going the way of America, with over-medicalised births and unnecessary interventions; I have interviewed a number of midwives and healthcare professionals in the past who would attest to that. After all, it is claimed, due to soaring birth rates and deep financial cuts, many hospitals are keen to try to control when and how babies are born. There is certainly anecdotal evidence of an increase in C-sections and other forms of medical interventions including forceps, as a result of a growing number of inductions to encourage labour in women deemed ‘overdue’. Meanwhile, more caesareans – which cost the NHS around £2,500 per procedure, compared to roughly £1000 for a vaginal delivery – are pulling resources away from the wards, where they are desperately with serious lack of funding fuelling what the General Secretary of the Royal College of Midwives, Cathy Warwick, has called a “crisis in midwifery”. Yet, in cases where having a section saves lives, as they frequently do, the final bill is clearly justified.
In my own experience, doctors and midwives have taken great care to ensure I have had as much information and positive choice as possible, within a given set of circumstances. Not once have I encountered a health professional who seemed gung-ho about offering a serious surgical procedure. Having had two sections, and awaiting my third with a slight sense of dread, I would discourage any woman from having one as an “easy” alternative to natural birth. While having a vaginal delivery comes with its own challenges and risks, the alternative – having layers of abdominal tissues severed, and the subsequent recovery process – is no small trade off. While you hear stories of celebrities paying to have a private section rather than birthing “naturally”, I can’t say I’ve ever met anyone who wants a caesarean because she doesn’t fancy doing it “the hard way”. Those who ‘elect’ for surgery generally do so for a range of compelling reasons. If we consider that while in the past 20 years, the birth rate in Britain has risen by 22 per cent there has been been a simultaneous surge in the number of older women giving birth for the first time, and of women getting pregnant who are obese or have pre-existing medical conditions, this would surely impact in part on the rise in the number of women legitimately opting for sections.
Though I don’t fit into any of the above categories, my own story is far from uncommon in its overall pattern. Four years ago I found myself in the same London hospital where I’d been born, birth bag in tow and ready to have my first baby. I was 27 years old, 42 weeks pregnant and had accepted the offer to be induced – a deviation from our original plan, which had been simple: birth centre, some nice music and a water-birth. After four days in non-progressive labour, during which I was seen by nine different midwives, it was agreed that I was to have a C-section. My waters had long-since burst, my partner and I had been awake for 96 hours – and for reasons still unknown, I’d not even dilated to one centimetre. So that was that.