
We have far too many interventions when it comes to birth, which can be one of the most natural things in the world. It's how us humans continue to populate the Earth. Most times we have sex the old fashioned way and therefore we can birth the way they did in olden times, too. Because it's human nature. But somewhere along the line we stopped trusting birth. Could you imagine if you stopped trusting sex? And had to have a doctor there to facilitate the experience ... with drugs?
I fault some of the medical community for poisoning our minds into thinking we need drugs to have our babies. And then we need more drugs. We need to schedule this. We need to get baby out now way before it's time. Let's schedule a c-section because the holiday is coming up and I want to go on vacation with my family so let's get this baby out.
Well, this just in! Insurance companies are basically telling hospitals to stop the c-section epidemic.
If you didn't believe there is a c-section epidemic, this may convince you. Insurance companies, often known for giving us a hard time with pre-existing conditions and required referrals and all the scary "This Is Not A Bill" paperwork, are feeling that hospitals have gone overboard with this expensive procedure and they're saying it's far too often unnecessary. Aetna and Cigna are leading the way.
Okay, maybe you are thinking it's because they don't want to pay. And yes, that's part of it. But think about this: C-sections cost on average $24,300 while a vaginal birth is around $15,200. Meaning doctors and hospitals make more money off c-sections. A lot more. And the attending doctor is the one who makes the money. Hence the scheduling so your doc can be there and take home the cash. Vaginal births can happen at any time, naturally, and if your OBGYN has a vacation coming up around your due date, he or she won't get paid if your baby decides to come when that doc is beach-bound.
I know it's not always like that. Maybe your c-section was necessary. Very necessary. Mine was. I get it. We need that knowledge and cesareans do save lives. But things have gotten out of hand.
Interestingly, Aetna wants to adjust prices for c-sections. And Cigna is considering the same, along with giving bonuses to hospitals who reduce early cesareans and inductions. This is wonderful news. Incentive. And if it happens, and if more or all insurance companies follow, I really believe our c-section rate will decline to a number that makes sense.
This isn't just about having a vaginal birth. This is about the safety and health of baby. It's been cited in a 2009 study in the New England Journal of Medicine that babies born at 38 weeks had twice the amount of medical problems compared to those born at 39 weeks. Every week is vital when in utero. The risk of complications at 37 weeks is nearly four times as much.
Image via one tiny spark/Flickr


Tie-Dye for the Fourth of July!
Kim and Kanye's Baby Name Predictions!
Moms Love Birthday Parties, Too!
Father Knows Best - Happy Father's Day!


















Comments 56
what about a breech baby that makes the mothers blood preasure get dangerously high during labor or a mom who's had toximia/pre-eclampsia her entire pregnancy and a c-section is the only safe way to deliver her child or children. these insurrance companies should butt out
I want to add that a c-section should not be a right that people can choose just because they want to as a few comments have mentioned. If you don't want to endure childbirth, then keep em closed! Nobody should EVER be given the ability to decide that they want a c-section because it is convenient or less painful for them...I would hate to see THOSE women as parents since they obviously put their own feelings and wants ahead of their own health and the health and welfare of their child!
What is crazy is how so many hospitals are afraid of lawsuits and won't even allow vbacs. My cousin had a c-section with her first born after 18 hours of labor, him not moving at all and his heartrate starting to significantly drop. If she hadn't moved to another state she could have been forced to deliver her daughter the same way. This time her water broke at 2:30am, very painful contractions immediately 3 minutes apart, and a baby born at 6:45am. My cousin even saw her c-section records, and she had received the worst kind to recover from and the most dangerous to try a vbac. But guess what, she and the baby are fine and home.
Doctors should in no way be financially pressured into one procedure or another because of what an insurance company thinks. My husband and I pay out the NOSE for insurance and if I want to have an elective c-sec then so be it. Unfortunately with my first my labor was extended and I ended up having one anyway...I'll be having my second in about a month and I plan on having a scheduled c-sec then. My doctor and I discussed the pros and cons of a V-bac and I just dont feel like its for me. No one else should make that decission for me!
1. I know plenty of mothers who are grateful for the advances in medicene that allow them to have children, when they couldn't have done it 'the old fashioned way'.
2. I 100% agree about planned c-sections! I think they are RIDUCULOUS! I had to have an emergency c-section at 31 weeks because my organs were failing. It was a horrendous recovery! There were way too many ways that I could have died/been horribly hurt and ways my twins could have been. The people that plan these c-sections out 2, 3 + weeks in advance are just moronic. Fine, you want to plan it at 40 weeks, but that's not going to happen...they are typically scheduled minimum 3 weeks ahead of due date.
PROPS to Cigna and Aetna!