Sleepingbubs, sorry your still bleeding honey
so annoyed they have moved your appointment, I know you still have one tomorrow but you must be so anxious. Will be thinking of you
x
Coralista, been doing more research. I read the study a bit closer to find out the actual risks were talking here. The findings were that infants born by section at 37 weeks were 4x more likely to suffer breathing difficulties compared to a Vaginal birth. at 38 weeks they were 3x more likely, and at 39 weeks 2x more likely. It also stated that "Cases of breathing problems that are associated with caesarean section births are generally not considered serious; however, they do typically require placing the infant in an incubator and administering oxygen treatment." The actual main conclusion of the study is more that elective C-section should be discouraged where it was not medically required. The women and babies had no medical need for C-section in the study.
So in actual fact, what it is saying is that a vaginal birth should be encouraged instead of a section where there is no medical reason for it. This is because of the increased risk of breathing difficulties in the newborn, which is higher at 37 weeks but in fact still remains to a slightly lesser degree at 39 weeks. When babies are born naturally, they birthing process seems to stimulate the respiratory system in the newborn. So simply the study said that vaginal births are better for babies, unless there is a medical need for a section. And if a section should be performed out of nothing but convenience, it should be left as late as possible. HOWEVER what we are talking about is a little O2 in the incubator after birth which is pretty common after c-sections right?
Sorry to bombard you with info
I bet that didn't even help, I'm trying
x