Choose your font:
 Arimo
 Merriweather
 Mukta Malar
 Open Sans Condensed
 Rokkitt
 Source Sans Pro
 Login


 English 
 Français 
 Português 

[Valid RSS] RSS

Database - Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR)

Description of this database

http://afar.info/id=832

Created on : 08 Jul 2004
Modified on : 02 Dec 2007


 Modify this record
Do not follow this link unless you know an editor’s password!

easy

Author(s) :

Lindballe PL.

Bibliographical entry (without author) :

Elective cesarean section. Letters.
Canadian Medical Association Journal 2004;171(1):13.

Year of publication :

2004

Résumé (français) :

Abstract (English):

I was disturbed to read Mary Hannah’s commentary1 outlining the possibility of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC) supporting the option of medically unnecessary cesarean sections. I am disappointed that cesarean section would be offered when little consideration is given to options at the other end of the spectrum.

Proponents of cesarean section on demand contend that a patient has the right to choose the course of care that best suits her situation. While this is entirely true, the fact remains that such choice has not always been the case. Personally, I was denied my preference of a vaginal birth after cesarean by 3 different physicians. My second choice was to give birth under the care of a midwife, a choice that the Alberta government forced me to pay for. If women are given the option to choose a cesarean section when it is medically unnecessary, they should also have to pay for this form of care. It is an outrage that cesarean section on demand — a medically unnecessary, costly procedure — is covered by Alberta health care while midwifery — a proven, safe, economical option — continues to be excluded.

If the SOGC truly wants to allow women to choose their course of maternity care, they have to fully support and champion the entire range of options available. This includes unmedicated physiologic birth attended by a midwife. If you are concerned about a patient’s choice, work to ensure that we all have access to the services we choose.

Sumário (português):

URL :

http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/171/1/13-b?eto…

Comments :

Argument (français) :

Argument (English):

Argumento (português):

Keywords :

c-section/caesarean ; deontology ; evidence-based medicine/midwifery ; vaginal birth after caesarean ; ethics

Author of this record :

Cécile_Loup — 08 Jul 2004


DateDiscussion (only in English)Author
 
➡ Only identified users



 I have read the guidelines of discussions and I accept all terms (read guidelines)

New expert query ---  New simple query

Creating new record --- Importing records

User management --- Dump database

bar

This database is managed by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR, http://afar.info)
affiliated with Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, http://ciane.net).
It is fed by the voluntary contributions of persons interested in the sharing of scientific data.
If you agree with this project, you can support us in several ways:
(1) becoming a member of AFAR
(2) financially supporting AFAR
(3) contributing to this database if you have a minimum training in scientific documentation.
Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
Contact afar.association(arobase)gmail.com for more information.

Valid CSS! Valid HTML!