Home

Back to Essays

Caesarean Section

Pat Riley writes on RAME: "There seems to be something afoot here more than just exercise. If you look at the foreign movies--Private, etc--the girls don't seem to have nearly the problem our local girls do with flabby bellies after birth. Maybe the foreign girls don't have kids <g> or more seriously, maybe it's something genetic, tied in with the whole problem of weight gain.

"Were you aware that the US rate of C-section is 27% of live births? Down from 30% five years ago. In some areas of the country--mainly wealthy yuppie suburbs--the rate is over 50%. Inner city ghetto hospitals range in the 15-20%--still too high but this might be one area where being poor has its advantages. The European rate for comparison is 10-12% and yet their infant mortality is lower than ours.

"Why? The midwives are hopping mad over the rate and contend that there are several main reasons:

"- convenience for both the doctor (no lawsuit if something goes wrong) and the gravida (technical term for a pregnant woman giving birth)

"- the use of picotin (sp?), a drug used to induce contractions. It seems to have a side effect of not allowing the time necessary for the birth canal (the pelvic horns) to shift so as to allow the baby's head through.

"- the use of epidural anesthesia which may reduce the contractions.

"- the theory that some females are influenced by their SO's (Significant Others) to have a C-section to maintain vaginal tightness. This is nonsense because apart from the immediate post-natal period the passage of the baby has no effect but apparently this theory is popular in South America.

"All of these are, of course, controversial. The doctors take the high ground and say they're taking the safe route but the midwives say lots of C-sections are unnecessary. Neither have too much sympathy for the argument that a C-section scar reduces the female's utility in the porn industry.

"I think there's another "let's not talk about it, it's too horrible to contemplate" reason: Because C-sections have been more popular in the US than Europe for a longer period of time we have actually artifically selected against vaginal delivery. More bluntly: we have produced a race of women who are defective. Maybe those inner city hospitals are doing less C-sections because lots of the females are black and their ancestors never had the opportunity to get a C-section.

"You seem to consider (maybe it was just the wording) that C-sections are for after several births but this is not the case. The first birth is usually the most traumatic and it's then the C-section will be done. There's an attempt at the moment (again from the midwives) to push VBAC--vaginal birth after C-section--for the second and subsequent children which is having some success thereby tending to bolster the argument that the first C-section was unnecessary.

"Have you also noticed the different types of scars? There's the vertical line from the pubic bone sometimes extending all the way up to the breastbone through the belly button (Kasey Rodgers in Debbie Does Dallas #1 and a small girl in Black Cheerleader Search #5 are two examples). This type has not been done in years in the US and has the big disadvantage of being parallel to the incision in the utereus thereby risking major tearing in future pregnancies. Then there's the Little Sinderella type which from what I understand is the way it's currently done: a small incision over the pubic bone and then the use of retractors to pull it open. There's a third type with seems to be a variation of the Little Sinderella effort but the scar extends all the way across the belly ending up in an upwards hook on the right hand side. I remember a girl with this type in one of those EVN garbage efforts with Ron Jeremy; based on the redness it looked like she had just come home from the hospital. There have been others." (RAME)