Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
interestrateripoff

Hospitals Ban Pregnant Women From Having Caesareans In Cost-Cutting Move

Recommended Posts

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2028443/Hospitals-ban-pregnant-women-having-c-sections-cost-cutting-move.html

A number of NHS trusts have said they will only give the go-ahead for a c-section if the woman’s health would be put at risk by a natural birth.

They have launched the crackdown on women who are ‘too posh to push’ – saying it wastes millions of pounds of NHS money every year.

But some mothers have attacked the restrictions, saying it should be a woman’s right to choose how their baby is born.

One quarter of all births in the UK are now by caesarean section, up from just 9 per cent in 1980, despite a campaign by the World Health Organisation which believes there is no justification for any country having a rate exceeding 15 per cent.

A planned caesarean is £800 more expensive than a natural birth – taking money from strained NHS budgets away from other priorities such as heart disease and cancer.

Economists estimate that a drop of 1 per cent in the proportion of women having the surgery would save the NHS an estimated £5.6million a year.

Wail hysteria or is this real?

The aim should be for a natural birth, I really can't see how having it this way is a right?

The savings seem a little small if 25% are a C section.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wail hysteria or is this real?

The aim should be for a natural birth, I really can't see how having it this way is a right?

The savings seem a little small if 25% are a C section.

Too posh to push? Belief that natural birth wrecks future sex life?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2028443/Hospitals-ban-pregnant-women-having-c-sections-cost-cutting-move.html

Wail hysteria or is this real?

The aim should be for a natural birth, I really can't see how having it this way is a right?

The savings seem a little small if 25% are a C section.

This is the first of many nhs services to be cut in the near future. Also on the hit list are tonsillectomy, hysterectomy, varicose veins but with budget cuts the list will grow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wail hysteria or is this real?

The aim should be for a natural birth, I really can't see how having it this way is a right?

The savings seem a little small if 25% are a C section.

The last three people I know to have babies all had C sections unplanned.

Whether it's because it's quicker than having to deal with a woman in long labour I don't know - but they are back home within three days which used to be about how long you'd be in for a natural birth 16 years ago.

(They used to penny pinch back then by having NOT ENOUGH GAS AND AIR Grr)

Edited by SarahBell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good move. When you start looking yourself at the benefits of surgeries, a stunning amount have no net benefit, yet are done anyway. One of the heart surgeries that 300,000 a year is done in the US.. there is no net benefit over not getting the surgery. Each of these surgeries costs 200,000$.

Caesarean sections are near criminal imo, unless the woman's life is in danger. It can cause a lot of complications down the road for women. Including serious problems when they go to have another child.

If women are too posh to push, then surely they can afford to go to a private hospital and pay for all the hospital expenses related to giving birth themselves. And imo they should not be covered by the NHS for future complications related to getting the Caesarean section.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leicester hospital trusts recently emailed 10000 staff to tell them there might no be any money to pay salaries. Services are also being slashed. Doesn't seem like ring fencing to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Dave had ring fenced if not increased NHS spending so why are theses cuts (no pun intended) being made ... unless to it's to show how bad and evil the Tories are?

We were discussing this on another thread.. and the conclusion seems to be that because the management and other higher ups in the system are still getting generous pay increases, and because the amount of funding is constant year over year.. the money to pay for those increases must come from reducing the number of lower level staff.

If a person who makes £200k a year receives a 10% pay increase that amounts to 20k extra the system has to come up with. Which many of the lower people only make 20k in a year.. so you have to get rid of one of them to fund that pay increase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Dave had ring fenced if not increased NHS spending so why are theses cuts (no pun intended) being made ... unless to it's to show how bad and evil the Tories are?

Probably just that.

Don't imagine any senior management jobs will go as with councils.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who else would require this treatment, other than "pregnant women"!

It's like saving money by witholding wheelchairs from the deaf! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the hospitals had been told to make more cuts?

Very good! One of us is awake at the back here! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a crock, the hospitals have not been allowing, encouraging or even performing C sections until literally the mother is likely to die for years.

My cousin in 2010 had to attempt to give birth to a still born baby despite the fact that her previous labour had ended in a caesarian, it was highly unlikely she could ever give birth naturally but they made her try despite the trauma and psychological pain to her.

I was pushed into a home birth because that too saves money, ended up in hospital anyway but that's another story, wonder who else will be bullied into treatment plans that aren't suitable to save money next.

Interestingly though my 85 year old neighbor has just undergone surgery to improve her quality of life, she never leaves the house so what they have actually achieved is a few more years in front of the TV, whilst carers come in twice a day at great expense to turn her over and feed her, madness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£800 sounds cheap, the NHS should offer more elective treatments for people who want to pay.

If you're too posh to push instead of a medical reason then spending £5K is going to look like a bargain, people spend more at dentists for cosmetic treatments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a crock, the hospitals have not been allowing, encouraging or even performing C sections until literally the mother is likely to die for years.

My cousin in 2010 had to attempt to give birth to a still born baby despite the fact that her previous labour had ended in a caesarian, it was highly unlikely she could ever give birth naturally but they made her try despite the trauma and psychological pain to her.

I was pushed into a home birth because that too saves money, ended up in hospital anyway but that's another story, wonder who else will be bullied into treatment plans that aren't suitable to save money next.

Interestingly though my 85 year old neighbor has just undergone surgery to improve her quality of life, she never leaves the house so what they have actually achieved is a few more years in front of the TV, whilst carers come in twice a day at great expense to turn her over and feed her, madness.

Thats why the NHS really needs to push more money into stem cell regeneration as it's save billions in the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£800 sounds cheap, the NHS should offer more elective treatments for people who want to pay.

If you're too posh to push instead of a medical reason then spending £5K is going to look like a bargain, people spend more at dentists for cosmetic treatments.

[/quote

I disagree Mr Nortwest! I am in heating and ventilating but an an amateur gynacologist!

I also play instruments at Bah Mitzvahs and funerals! I am well cheap! :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a total "non-story".

I had an emergency c-section last year because both my baby and myself were dying.

I'm pregnant again and will ask for an elective section, for the reasons as:

i) previous c-section meaning my uterus "may" not take the strain of a natural labour

ii) I am suffering from SPD/PGP (in laymans terms, my pelvis is coming apart at the seams)

iii) having nearly lost my child last time I'm terrified of what "might" happen (psychological reason)

iv) A vaginal birth at my age and medical history will (50%+) likely end up in a subsequent emergency section

Doctors don't give out c-sections willy-nilly. Anyone with a deep-rooted fear of a vaginal birth would be considered psychologically unsuitable to do it anyway.

If I were to be forced to have a vaginal birth in which my baby dies, how much can I sue the hospital for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether it's because it's quicker than having to deal with a woman in long labour I don't know - but they are back home within three days which used to be about how long you'd be in for a natural birth 16 years ago.

If you're going to restrict the debate to economic factors (and I'm not suggesting that you should), it seems to me that this issue is whether the up-front cost of a c-section reduces the medical cost of the pregnancy, birth and post-natal process overall. Does the money you save on not offering a c-section at the point of birth usually lead to extra costs in treating the mother later (especially during a second pregnancy)? If so, this seems to me to be a counterproductive move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a total "non-story".

I had an emergency c-section last year because both my baby and myself were dying.

I'm pregnant again and will ask for an elective section, for the reasons as:

i) previous c-section meaning my uterus "may" not take the strain of a natural labour

ii) I am suffering from SPD/PGP (in laymans terms, my pelvis is coming apart at the seams)

iii) having nearly lost my child last time I'm terrified of what "might" happen (psychological reason)

iv) A vaginal birth at my age and medical history will (50%+) likely end up in a subsequent emergency section

Doctors don't give out c-sections willy-nilly. Anyone with a deep-rooted fear of a vaginal birth would be considered psychologically unsuitable to do it anyway.

If I were to be forced to have a vaginal birth in which my baby dies, how much can I sue the hospital for?

Sounds like you would not be affected by the potential new ruling. Anyone with medical reasons will surely still be given the most appropriate treatment?

There is a more fundemental issue here however. Many of my friends (all turning 30sih) are absolutely terrified at the prospect of natural delivery and I am now convinced that the soaps/films etc are responsible. How often does one see a 'regular' birth on a soap now? There is almost always some crisis and horrendous life or death situation no wonder so many who do not need to 'elect' for what they percieve as the easy way out.

I know a number of people who have given birth naturally and whilst they maybe didn't enjoy the experience things were 'normal' these are the stories that need circulating. Maybe it is because I am from farming stock and I have experienced hundreds of births from all kind of different animals that I have a more realistic idea of what it involves I am not surprised so many mothers reluctant to go through with things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Dave had ring fenced if not increased NHS spending so why are theses cuts (no pun intended) being made ... unless to it's to show how bad and evil the Tories are?

It is ring fenced, but inflation is out of control so costs are rising much faster than the budget. Also the ageing population creates more demand for expensive life extending interventions. There are going to be some serious rationing measures, and these will increasingly involve a trade off between cost and benefit in terms of quality life gained. If you need expensive treatment to gain another 6 months of life that involves serious functional limitation you will be placed on a 6 month waiting list while the NHS seeks financial approval.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a crock, the hospitals have not been allowing, encouraging or even performing C sections until literally the mother is likely to die for years.

My cousin in 2010 had to attempt to give birth to a still born baby despite the fact that her previous labour had ended in a caesarian, it was highly unlikely she could ever give birth naturally but they made her try despite the trauma and psychological pain to her.

I was pushed into a home birth because that too saves money, ended up in hospital anyway but that's another story, wonder who else will be bullied into treatment plans that aren't suitable to save money next.

Interestingly though my 85 year old neighbor has just undergone surgery to improve her quality of life, she never leaves the house so what they have actually achieved is a few more years in front of the TV, whilst carers come in twice a day at great expense to turn her over and feed her, madness.

Maybe boomers and the older generation will get 'grandfathered' in with health care. They get the works.. anything they ask for done with no thought to cost.

While Gen X and younger will get a much reduced service plan. Broken femur bone from a car accident? ... 'walk it off'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Gen X and younger will get a much reduced service plan. Broken femur bone from a car accident? ... 'walk it off'.

+1

Got cholera, Sweat it out

Got Rabies, DErink some water

Broken nose, take a tissue

Broken wrist, use the other one for it

Yep, very likely

Edited by Tamara De Lempicka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is ring fenced, but inflation is out of control so costs are rising much faster than the budget. Also the ageing population creates more demand for expensive life extending interventions. There are going to be some serious rationing measures, and these will increasingly involve a trade off between cost and benefit in terms of quality life gained. If you need expensive treatment to gain another 6 months of life that involves serious functional limitation you will be placed on a 6 month waiting list while the NHS seeks financial approval.

That is so right.

Some of the costs where i work (not NHS but associated costs) have risen 20%+ within a year we can just about cover it for now but if it continues things will start to look a bit more questionable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe boomers and the older generation will get 'grandfathered' in with health care. They get the works.. anything they ask for done with no thought to cost.

While Gen X and younger will get a much reduced service plan. Broken femur bone from a car accident? ... 'walk it off'.

Well that's fine but as a HCP I shall be charging an extra grand an hour to anyone over the age of 60 from onwards :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My ex had a C-section after she had been in labour for over 12 hours all night trying to deliver twins, she was becoming very tired and they gave her an unplanned C section.

So in a way I can understand why these operations happen despite the cost.

Having said that, we all know that women make a big song and dance about it and that if men gave birth, we would be back at work half an hour later ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 277 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.