Pages

Saturday, February 21, 2009

The back story to the Times article

Pamela Paul, author of the Times article The Trouble With Repeat Cesareans, wrote another article in The Huffington Post: Childbirth Without Choice. This piece gives the back story of the Times article, including her own fight to have a VBAC in a supposedly "pro-VBAC" hospital.

She writes:
I wrote an article in this week's issue of Time magazine called "The Trouble With Repeat Cesareans" on the subject of women's diminishing patient's rights. I won't repeat the story here, since you can link to it here, but will give some of the back story for those who want more:

This was a story I've been wanting to write for a long time. The short version is, doctors and hospitals are no longer allowing many women to have a vaginal birth after cesarean (or VBAC, pronounced "vee-back") because the "medicolegal" costs are too high. Or, as one ob-gyn put it when I asked why she and other doctors no longer allow VBACs, ""It's a numbers thing. It is financially unsustainable for doctors, hospitals and insurers to engage in a practice when the cost of doing business way exceeds the payback. You don't get sued for doing a C-section; you get sued for not doing a C-section."

Read the rest of the article here.

2 comments:

  1. makes me want to throw-up. I'm glad she's writing and getting the word out-- WAKE UP PEOPLE!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Quoting from the article about the malpractice insurance costs: "And those costs aren't even reasonable, but are largely in response to a few high-profile cases of VBACs gone awry dating back 10 years, many of which involved a labor-induction drug called Cytotec, which is no longer used during vaginal births after cesarean."

    This is another part of the whole debacle that really annoys me -- *who* is suing for not doing a C-section? I have a huge interest in the topic of birth and follow it fairly closely; I have never yet heard of a woman who actually sued a doctor for a vaginal birth gone wrong. And as this article mentions, those cases that *did* occur had the complicating factor of being grossly mismanaged VBACs in the first place.

    As for the number of women who'd *like* to sue for an unnecessary c-secion, I know there are hundreds of them, and when they start looking into what needs to be done they learn they've barely got a leg to stand on because they're supposed to be grateful they got a healthy baby and don't they know the doctor did everything they possibly could to ensure a safe vaginal birth? Bah.

    ReplyDelete