Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About BornAtTheRightTime

  • Rank
    HPC Newbie
  1. "Table 9: Method of delivery by method of onset of labour, 2009-10" Not all deliveries involve labour... Yes, you misunderstand. You should be looking at Table 8: Method of delivery, 1980 to 2009-10. That covers all births.
  2. You have attempted to pervert the numbers by assuming all unknowns are c-sections. Unknowns have to be excluded - these aren't unknown c-sections, they are unknown birth methods and will likely follow the published ratios anyway ie 62.4% spontaneous natural etc etc. You have also claimed Spontaneous births, ie natural births, are some kind of C-section! According to your quoted source there were 652,377 deliveries of which 16,636 were unknown birth method in 2009-2010. Excluding unknown, natural births with no intervention (ie Spontaneous) accounted for 62.4%, with a further 12.8% natural
  3. For the same reasons I am getting similar crap I suspect. Some people like to believe the worst of others and promote their distorted viewpoint loudly, particularly where women's issues are concerned, but anywhere where they can see 'their' taxes not being directly spent on them instead.
  4. They are running at 25%, split into less than 10% of all births being planned c-section, and the remainder of those, ie 15%, being emergency c-sections. Of the planned c-sections numbers are not published distinguishing between how many are 'too lazy to push' as you put it, and how many considered medically necessary, but as you should clearly see by far the large majority of all c-sections are medically necessary., planned or not. All this information is given in the link I provided earlier but it appears you have chosen not to read it. Why not choose to be educated instead of persisting i
  5. Did you read my post entirely? if I thought I had a strong likelihood of a successful labour and a baby without a serious neck condition, I would be happy to go along with the natural birth. However, I believe I have a stronger risk of ending up with an emergency c-section with triple the risk to baby and myself compared to a planned c-section. I am trying to make the point that in my current experience it isn't the 'too posh to push' sentiment that is being targeted. It is ALL potential planned c-sections regardless of medical history, which will result in a drop in planned c-sections and
  6. US statistics are not relevant. Try this instead, which helped form my opinion and refers to the UK.
  7. On the contrary. The ante-natal classes preach avoiding c-sections wherever possible and I was simply following their advice until given a sound reason to do otherwise. Even the midwife on the Trust which would have me bound to a bed for 48 hours immovable used the word barbaric. As did the midfwife at the new Trust who had evidently become aware of this new process. If I am 'shopping' it is purely to find a Trust which will prioritise my previous history rather than their current budget. No, it wasn't. But you clearly choose to believe the worst of me rather than the words I have wr
  8. Complete and utter misogynistic ********. A huge number of babies survive now thanks to c-sections that would simply have died back in history or indeed in other countries. Of course there are women who do not want to go through the pain or indignities of labour, but they are hardly having the majority of c-sections.
  9. I've been expecting this story to appear in the media given the treatment I have received from my home NHS Trust regarding my current pregnancy. My first child was born in 2009 under a c-section due to being an undiagnosed breech birth. After my waters breaking I spent 3 days waiting to go into labour. During this time a scan revealed the breech position and I then experienced several shift-changes of Consultants all doing their best to convince me to abandon my plan for a natural birth and elect for a c-section later that night. A second scan revealed that the baby could not be turned (no
  10. Perhaps the EA meant he can't get there from his house? Assuming he doesn't live at the office. I have a clear run to the motorway, if only I could get out of my road...
  11. 10 million people will be playing the expansion to World of Warcraft on Dec 7th... Perhaps the protestors should choose a different day.
  12. So from what I've read on this site, if I spend my house fund on gold it could get confiscated. If I put it towards a house, it could get confiscated. If I buy USD, it'll be worth nothing as the US is imploding. If I buy Euros, they'll be worth nothing once the Euro is abandoned. If I buy stocks and shares, they'll be worth nothing eventually as the markets are well overvalued thanks to all the newly minted money floating around. if I keep it in sterling, it'll be worth nothing due to hyper inflation, or possibly be confiscated. At least if I buy a house I have the option of living in it
  13. When Des was looking after the wee undergraduates 20 years ago it was "Take the 3 month placement in Halewood or else!" Glad to see he hasn't lost his touch...
  14. Billericay is one of the most desirable places in southern Essex, mainly thanks to the well paid Ford engineers working locally. (Isn't that right, Feed?!).
  15. Seems like a nice thing to do all round. Go for it.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.