Caesarean section and maternal choices

Fetal and Maternal Medicine Review

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 1-25

  Weaver, Jane ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WEST LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; LABOR; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MIDWIFE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 2542490264     PISSN: 09655395     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0965539503001165     Document Type: Review

References (132)

1. Ventura SJ, Martin JA, Curtin SC, Mathews TJ, Park MM. Births: final data for 1998. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2000; 48: 1-100.
2. Chalmers I. Trends and variations in the use of caesarean delivery. In: Clinch J, Matthews T, eds. Perinatal medicine. Procedings of the IX European Congress of Perinatal Medicine, September 3rd-5th 1984, Dublin, Ireland. Lancaster: MTP Press, 1985: 145-49.
3. Notzon FC, Placek PJ, Taffel SM. Comparisons of national cesarean-section rates. N Engl J Med 1987; 316: 386-89.
4. Bergsjø P, Schmidt E, Pusch D. Differences in the reported frequencies of some obstetrical interventions in Europe. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1983; 90: 628-32.
5. Castro A. Commentary: increase in caesarean sections may reflect medical control not women's choice. Br Med J 1999; 319: 1401-02.
6. Eftekhar K, Steer P. Women choose Caesarean section. Br Med J 2000; 320: 1072.
7. Johanson R, Newburn M, Macfarlane A. Education and debate. Has the medicalisation of child birth gone too far? Br Med J 2002; 324: 892-95.
8. Marwick JC, Lynn R. High caesarean rates among women over 30. Effect of age is continuous and international. Br Med J 2001; 323: 284.
9. Weaver J, Statham H, Richards MPM. High rates may be due to perceived potential for complications. Br Med J 2001; 323: 284.
10. Gamble JA, Creedy DK. Women's request for cesarean section: a critique of the literature. Birth 2000; 27: 256-63.
11. Womersley T. Celebrity mothers blamed after rise in number of Caesarean births. The Scotsman 2002; 16th July.
12. Laurance J. Natural birth in decline as 1 in 5 has Caesarean. The Independent 2001; 26 October.
13. Duckworth L. Rate of Caesarean birth has risen a fifth since 1998. The Independent 2002; 1st May.
14. Martin N. Caesarean celebrities who are 'too posh to push'. The Daily Telegraph 2001; 22nd May.
15. Weaver J. Court-ordered caesarean sections. In: Bainham A, Day Sclater S, Richards M eds. Body lore and laws. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2002; 229-47.
16. Francome C. The fashion for caesareans. New Society 1986; 17 January: 100-10.
17. Macfarlane A, Mugford M, Henderson J, Furtado A, Stevens J, Dunn A. Obstetric intervention rates by mothers' age and parity, NHS hospital births, England and Wales, 1967, 1975, 1980, England, 1980, 1985, 1994/5. Birth Counts: Statistics of Pregnancy and Child birth. London: The Stationery Office, 2000.
18. Government Statistical Service. NHS Maternity Statistics, England: 1995-96 to 1997-98. London: Government Statistical Service, 2001.
19. Thomas JI, Paranjothy S. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. The National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit Report. London: RCOG Press, 2001.
20. Expert Advisory Group on Caesarean Section in Scotland. Report and recommendations to the Chief Medical Officer of the Scottish Executive, Health Department. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive, Health Department, 2001.
21. Koc I. Increased caesarean section rates in Turkey. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2003; 8: 1-10.
22. Belizán JM, Barros FC, Alexander S. Rates and implications of caesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study. Br Med J 1999; 319: 1397-400.
23. Potter JE, Berquó E, Perpétuo HO, Leal OF, Hopkins K, Souza MR et al. Unwanted caesarean sections among public and private patients in Brazil: prospective study. Br Med J 2001; 323: 1155-58.
24. World Health Organisation. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet 1985; 2: 436-37.
25. Wagner M. Choosing caesarean section. Lancet 2000; 356: 1677-80.
26. Enkin M, Keirse MJNC, Renfrew M, Neilson J. A Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
27. Peskin EG, Reine GM. What is the correct cesarean rate and how do we get there? Obstet Gynecol Surv 2002; 57: 189-90.
28. Chapple J. The rising caesarean rate is a public health issue. In: The rising caesarean rate - A public health issue. Conference proceedings 23 November at The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London. London: Profile Productions Ltd; 1999.
29. Wagner M. Critique of British RCOG National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit report of Oct 2001. MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 2001; 12: 366-70.
30. Graham WJ, Hundley V, McCheyne AL, Hall MH, Gurney E, Milne J. An investigation of women's involvement in the decision to deliver by caesarean section. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106: 213-20.
31. Quinlivan JA, Petersen RW, Nichols CN. Patient preference the leading indication for elective caesarean section in public patients - Results of a 2-year Prospective Audit in a Teaching Hospital. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 39: 207-14.
32. Gamble JA, Creedy DK. Women's preference for a caesarean section: incidence and associated factors. Birth 2001; 28: 101-09.
33. Irvine LM, Shaw RW. Trial of scare or elective repeat caesarean section at maternal request? J Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 21: 463-67.
34. Jackson NV, Irvine LM. The influence of maternal request on the elective caesarean section rate. J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 18: 115-19.
35. Robinson J. Caesarean section: women's choice. Br J Midwifery 1998; 6: 669.
36. Robinson J. The demand for caesareans: fact or fiction? Br J Midwifery 1999; 7: 306.
37. Marx H, Wiener J, Davies N. A survey of the influence of patients' choice on the increase in the caesarean section rate. J Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 21: 124-27.
38. Wilkinson C, McIlwaine G, Boulton-Jones C, Cole S. Is a rising caesarean section rate inevitable? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 105: 45-52.
39. Anderson T. A survey of the influence of patients' choice on the increase in the caesarean section rate. Commentary. MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 2001; 11: 368-70.
40. Mould TAJ, Chong S, Spencer JAD, Gallivan S. Women's involvement with the decision preceding their caesarean section and their degree of satisfaction. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 103: 1074-77.
41. Churchill H. Caesarean Birth. Experience, Practice and History. Hale, Cheshire: Books for Midwives Press, 1997.
42. Hemminki E. Caesarean sections: Women's choice for giving birth? Birth 1997; 24: 124-25.
43. Al-Mufti R, McCarthy A, Fisk NM. Obstetricians' personal choice and mode of delivery. Lancet 1996; 347: 544.
44. Parsons S. Too posh to push? No, too frightened. The Times T2 2002; 3rd July.
45. Rice M. The rise and rise of the caesarean. You. The Mail on Sunday 1999; 23 May: 38-43.
46. Groom KM, Paterson-Brown S, Fisk NM. Temporal and geographical variation in UK obstetricians' personal preference regarding mode of delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2002; 100: 185-88.
47. Dickson MJ, Willett M. Midwives would prefer a vaginal delivery. Br Med J 1999; 319: 1008.
48. McGurgan P, Coulter-Smith S, O'Donovan PJ. A national confidential survey of obstetrician's personal preferences regarding mode of delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001; 97: 17-19.
49. Wright JB, Wright AL, Simpson NAB, Bryce FC. A survey of trainee obstetricians preferences for childbirth. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001; 97: 23-25.
50. Johanson RB, El-Timini S, Rigby C, Young P, Jones P. Caesarean section by choice could fulfil the inverse care law. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001; 97: 20-22.
51. LaPiere R. Attitudes versus actions. Social Forces 1934; 13: 230-37.
52. Geary M, Fanagan M, Boylan P. Maternal satisfaction with management in labour and preference for mode of delivery. J Perinat Med 1997; 25: 433-39.
53. Turnbull DA, Wilkinson C, Yaser A, Carty V, Svigos JM, Robinson JS. Women's role and satisfaction in the decision to have a caesarean section. Med J Aust 1999; 170: 580-83.
54. Donati S, Grandolfo ME, Andreozzi S. Do Italian mothers prefer cesarean delivery. Birth 2003; 30: 89-93.
55. Hopkins K. Are Brazilian women really choosing to deliver by cesarean? Soc Sci Med 2000; 51: 725-40.
56. Murray SF. Relation between private health insurance and high rates of caesarean section in Chile: qualitative and quantitative study. Br Med J 2000; 321: 1501-05.
57. Wu C. Western Medicine Meets Superstitious Women? Explaining the Increasing Cesarean Section Rate in Taiwan. In: Annual meeting of the American Sociological Association; 1998; San Francisco.
58. Edwards GJ, Davies NJ. Elective caesarean section - the patient's choice? J Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 21: 128-29.
59. Hofberg K, Brockington I. Tokophobia: An unreasoning dread of childbirth. A series of 26 cases. Br J Psychiatry 2000; 176: 83-85.
60. Chaffer D, Royle L. The use of audit to explain the rise in caesarean section. Br J Midwifery 2000; 8: 677-84.
61. Ryding EL. Investigation of 33 women who demanded a caesarean section for personal reasons. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1993; 72: 280-85.
62. Hall MH, Bewley S. Maternal mortality and mode of delivery. Lancet 1999; 354: 776.
63. Hillan EM. Caesarean section: perinatal risks. Nursing Standard 1991; 5: 37-39.
64. Maternal and Child Health Research Consortium. Confidential Enquiry into Stillbirths and Deaths in Infancy. London: HMSO, 2001. 8th Annual Report.
65. Paterson-Brown S, Fisk NM. Caesarean section: every woman's right to choose? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 1997; 9: 351-55.
66. Bewley S, Cockburn J. The unfacts of 'request' caesarean section. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2002; 109: 597-605.
67. Smith GCS, Pell JP, Cameron AD, Dobbie R. Risk of perinatal death associated with labor after previous cesarean delivery in uncomplicated term pregnancies. J Am Med Assoc 2002; 287: 2684-690.
68. Goer H. VBAC safety: A closer look at the 2002 JAMA study. http://www.parentsplace.com/expert/birthguru/articles; 2002.
69. Mason L, Glenn S, Walton I, Appleton C. The prevalence of stress incontinence during pregnancy and following delivery. Midwifery 1999; 15: 120-28.
70. Sultan AH, Stanton SL. Preserving the pelvic floor and perineum during childbirth - elective caesarean section? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 103: 731-34.
71. Wattchow DA, Rieger N. Faecal incontinence after vaginal delivery. Lancet 1999; 354: 965-66.
72. Barrett G, McCandlish R. Caesarean section: better for your sex life? MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 2002; 12: 377-79.
73. Corrigan S. The benefits of having a nice, clean cut. The Times 1997; 15 July.
74. Hillan EM. Caesarean section: maternal risks. Nursing Standard 1991; 5: 26-29.
75. Hillan E. The aftermath of caesarean delivery. MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 2000; 10: 70-72.
76. Hemminki E, Meriläinen J. Long-term effects of cesarean sections: Ectopic pregnancies and placental problems. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174: 1569-74.
77. Murphy DJ, Stirrat GM, Heron J. The relationship between Caesarean section and subfertility in a population-based sample of 14,541 pregnancies. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 1914-917.
78. Morrison JJ, Rennie JM, Milton PJ. Neonatal respiratory morbidity and mode of delivery at term: influence of timimg of elective caesarean section. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995; 102: 101-06.
79. Parilla BV, Dooley SL, Jansen RD, Socol ML. Iatrogenic respiratory distress syndrome following elective repeat caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 81: 392-95.
80. Anonymous. Fetal laceration injury underreported. Int J Fertil Womens Med 1997; 42: 277.
81. Smith JF, Hernandez C, Wax JR. Fetal laceration injury at cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 344-46.
82. Chazotte C, Cohen WR. Catastrophic complications of previous cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 163: 738-42.
83. Enkin M, Keirse MJNC, Chalmers I. A Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1989.
84. Bewley S, Cockburn J. The unethics of 'request' caesarean section. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2002; 109: 593-96.
85. Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, Willan AR. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet 2000; 356: 1375-383.
86. Keirse MJNC. Evidence-based childbirth only for breech babies? Birth 2002; 29: 55-59.
87. Giuliani A, Schöll WMJ, Basver A, Tamussino KF. Mode of delivery and outcome of 699 term singleton breech deliveries at a single center. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 187: 1694-98.
88. Halmesmäki E. Vaginal term breech delivery - a time for reappraisal. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2001; 80: 190-97.
89. Wickham S. National breech rescue! Practising Midwife 2003; 6: 38.
90. Francome C, Savage W. Caesarean section in Britain and the United States 12% or 24%: is either the right rate? Soc Sci Med 1993; 37: 1199-218.
91. McAleese S. Caesarean section for maternal choice. Midwifery Matters 2000; 84: 12-14.
92. Wagner M. Critique of British RCOG National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit report of Oct 2001. MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 2001; 12: 366-70.
93. Al-Mufti R, McCarthy A, Fisk NM. Survey of obstetricians' personal preference and discretionary practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1997; 73: 1-4.
94. Paterson-Brown S. Should doctors perform an elective caesarean section on request? Yes, as long as the woman is fully informed. Br Med J 1998; 317: 462-63.
95. Wagner M. The public health versus clinical approach maternity services: the emperor has no clothes. J Public Health Policy 1988; 19: 25-35.
96. Olantunbosun CA, Edouard L, Pierson RA. British physicians' attitudes to evidence based obstetric practice. Br Med J 1998; 316: 365-66.
97. Birchard K. Defence union suggests new approach to handling litigation costs in Ireland. Lancet 1999; 354: 1710.
98. Jourdan T. Why more babies are taking the short cut. Daily Telegraph 2001; 29th October.
99. Department of Health. Changing Childbirth. The Report of the Expert Maternity Group. London: HMSO, 1993.
100. Rothwell H. Changing Childbirth ... changing nothing. Midwives 1996; 109: 291-94.
101. Feinmann J. How to limit caesareans on demand - too NICE to push? Lancet 2002; 9308: 774.
102. Jowitt M. Small change. Midwifery Matters 1998; 77.
103. Guillan M. In: MIDIRS Midwifery Digest; 1995.
104. Hodnett ED. Caregiver support for women during childbirth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000; (1).
105. Audit Commission. First Class Delivery. Improving Maternity Services in England and Wales. London: Audit Commission; 1997.
106. Clement S. Childbirth on television. Br J Midwifery 1997; 2: 368-70.
107. Boseley S. Caesarean births soar to one in five: Survey puts UK way above WHO limits. The Guardian 2001; 26 Oct.
108. Gerrard N. Birth on a knife edge. The Guardian 2001; 12th August.
109. Knight I. Groping for an excuse. The Sunday Times 2000; 14 May.
110. Fane O. I wouldn't have them any other way. Daily Telegraph 2000; 27 April.
111. Bowen M, Ockendon H. Episiotomy and fecal incontinence. Lancet 1999; 354: 2169-.
112. Fitzsimons S. Too posh to push? The Guardian 2001; 14 Jun.
113. Kerby J. More money, less push. Sunday Times 2002; 17 Nov.
114. Beech BAL. Another enforced caesarean. AIMS Journal 2000; 12: 22.
115. Lindgren K. Maternal-fetal conflict: court-ordered cesarean section. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 1996; 25: 653-56.
116. Hornstra D. A realistic approach to maternal-fetal conflict. Hastings Cent Rep 1998; Sept-Oct: 7-12.
117. Rhoden NK. The judge in the delivery room: the emergence of court-ordered caesareans. California Law Review 1986; 74: 1951-2030.
118. Hewson B. Editorial. Court-ordered caesareans: an unnecessary development. Br J Midwifery 1996; 4: 509-10.
119. Fovargue S, Miola J. Policing pregnancy: implications of the Attorney-General's reference (No. 3 of 1994). Med Law Review 1998; 6: 265-96.
120. Mason JK, McCall Smith RA. Law and Medical Ethics. 5th ed. London: Butterworths; 1999.
121. Dyer C. Woman can challenge hospital over forced caesarean. Br Med J 1997; 315: 78.
122. Campbell R. The place of birth. In: Alexander J, Levy V, Roch S eds. Intrapartum care. A research based approach. London: Macmillan, 1990; 1-23.
123. Martin E. The Woman in the Body. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1987.
124. Oakley A. The Captured Womb. Oxford: Blackwell, 1984.
125. Schwarz E. The engineering of childbirth: a new obstetric programme as reflected in British obstetric textbooks, 1960-1980. In: Garcia J, Kilpatrick R, Richards MPM, eds. The Politics of Maternity Care. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990; 47-60.
126. Anderson T. Editorial. The birth of love. The Practising Midwife 2000; 3: 4-5.
127. Wagner M. Pursuing the Birth Machine. The Search for Appropriate Birth Technology. Camperdown, Australia: ACE Graphics, 1994.
128. Richards MPM. Innovation in medical practice: obstetricians and the induction of labour in Britain. Soc Sci Med 1975; 9: 595-602.
129. Bailey-Harris R. Pregnancy, autonomy and refusal of medical treatment. The Law Quarterly Review 1998; 114: 550-55.
130. Thomson M. Reproducing narrative. Gender, reproduction and law. Aldershot: Ashgate Dartmouth, 1998.
131. Usher JM. The psychology of the female body. London: Routledge, 1989.
132. McLean S. Old Law, New Medicine: Medical Ethics and Human Rights. London: Pandora, 1999.