We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THE NUMBER OF women who attempt vaginal birth (known as VBAC in maternal medicine) after a previous Caesarean operation remains low – and the risk to them and their infants remains higher when compared to having another C-section, the Canadian Medical Association has found.
Researchers conducted a study using information on all women in Canada (excluding Quebec) who had a previous Caesarean delivery and subsequently delivered between 2003 and 2015.
It found that the number of adverse outcomes – to either baby or mother are low.
“Both are reasonable options for women in general,” says Dr. Carmen Young, University of Alberta.
“However, attempted VBAC continues to be associated with higher relative rates of severe adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes compared with an elective repeat Caesarean delivery.”
It is a common perception that once a woman has had a C-section, she should not subsequently attempt vaginal birth and the authors of this research say planning the mode of delivery for such women is challenging for both the patient and her care provider.
They found that, although the number of women with a previous cesarean delivery increased from 2003 to 2014, the amount of attempted VBAC and their success rates were essentially unchanged.
Though the rates of adverse effects (including death of mothers and infants) were low in both attempted VBAC and a repeat cesarean delivery, Dr Young advises caution.
With VBAC, there is a higher risk of uterine rupture, hemorrhage and other maternal and infant complications. Repeat Caesarean sections also come with their own share of risks due to surgical and placental complications in subsequent pregnancies.
“This topic is an important issue because rates of Caesarean section continue to rise and the most common single indication for a Caesarean delivery is a prior Caesarean delivery,” says Dr Young.
Once a woman has had two cesarean deliveries, she is very unlikely to have a subsequent vaginal delivery due to high maternal and neonatal risks associated with labour.
The study also found that infant, but not maternal, outcomes have worsened between 2003 and 2015 after attempted VBAC.
According to the organisation, the research highlights the importance of appropriate patient selection for attempting VBAC and careful monitoring of labour and delivery for the safety of both mothers and infants.
“For women who may be candidates for an attempted VBAC, the choice between an elective repeat cesarean delivery and an attempted VBAC depends on the woman’s desire for a vaginal delivery, her tolerance for risk and whether she is planning a small or large family,” says Dr Young.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
He was an A-H so good riddance to him.
@Con Cussed: Your right in my opinion but if you are a newsperson you should not be biast on air . Even if it’s sometimes almost impossible they have to be professional.
@Con Cussed: I fully agree with you how ever,if you are a news person than you can’t be biast on air but you have to stay professional. How difficult it may be.
@Hans Vos: i disagree. They should present the news in an unbiased manner but can still express their own opinion
@Hans Vos: you have obviously not watched GB news or TalkTv yet,its like watching a 24 hour conservative commercial.
@derek hennessy: all news outlets have gone this way, not just conservative ones.
The face of BBC Gary Lineker every single day social media shows his bias and yet he just gets a slap on wrist and continues to be kept on the air.
The BBC showing the lack of consistency when it comes to there hightest paid presenter across any form.
@Paul Murphy: Ah come on now. Does anybody care that he’s biased towards Leicester City?
More like NorthKorea .com Must be stony faced and only say “The Party & new Dear Leader brings bountiful luxuries for the people of Great country”
It must be very difficult for journalists and newscasters to keep a straight face all the time when confronted by situations and politicians that they know are ludicrous in the extreme.
@Liam Dunne: indeed as sf sue every rumble and tumble money in Dail Eireann.
It’s gone mad over there the lady is right.
Have they ever watched or listened to Nolan on BBC north?????
@M Bowe: Nolan isn’t the state broadcaster though, it’s a Opinion talkshow, impartiality doesn’t have to factor into Nolans show. That’s the difference.
That’s a bit hasty. If you want proper bias look at GB NEWS for any two minutes of the day. It’s bias super charged.
@Ray Dunne: GB News isn’t the National Broadcaster, paid for by everyone (TV licence) in England. That’s why BBC News and their reporters have to be impartial. The news, no matter how you may want it, cannot/should not show bias.
What about all the Corbyn bashers??!! What about the persistent abuse and eventual decimation of the Labour Party by many on the BBC in particular? I hold them at least partly responsible for the UK’s economic mess.
Quick take her off air, how dare she have an opinion.
If a male journalist reacted the same way, would he have been dealt with differently, or at all?
Peter Allis had to apologise for a comment ( if he putts this she can have a new kitchen). The BBC being rediculus.
Another new one for the Times Radio.
have your say