Induction is wrong, wrong, wrong… wait, what?

I hear all the time how induction in VBAC is contraindicated. This is false. This is the kind of misinformation that materializes when we demonize all induction rather than specifying that elective inductions are not worth the increased risks.

It’s important to use clear, specific language when we talk about birth because there is a lot of confusion among moms, advocates, doulas, and health care providers about VBAC and induction. When I point out the lack of clarity many people have on the topic to “anti-induction advocates” (for the lack of a better term), they respond with the fact that their focus is warning moms about elective inductions, which is absolutely needed. And they genuinely believe that people are aware of the distinction between elective and medically-indicated inductions. However, that has not been my experience, in fact it’s been quite the opposite.  There are many people who don’t understand the why, when, and how of inducing VBACs and that is impacting the abilities of women to make informed decisions and exercise their right of patient autonomy.

First, you can induce VBACs

To be clear, medically indicated induction in a VBAC is not contraindicated! Yet, many, many, many people persist that it is citing ACOG (1) and the Pitocin insert (2). ACOG clearly says in their latest VBAC guidelines (3) that “induction remains an option” in a mom planning a VBAC via Pitocin or Foley catheter. The Pitocin drug insert (2) does state, “Except in unusual circumstances, oxytocin [Pitocin] should not be administered in the following conditions” and then lists “previous major surgery on the cervix or uterus including cesarean section.” However, despite conventional wisdom, a prior cesarean is not listed under the contraindications section.  Further, the drug insert recognizes the value of individualized care:

The decision [to use Pitocin in a woman with a prior cesarean] can be made only by carefully weighing the potential benefits which oxytocin can provide in a given case against rare but definite potential for the drug to produce hypertonicity or tetanic spasm.

This is in line with ACOG’s latest VBAC recommendations (3) where they say, “Respect for patient autonomy supports the concept that patients should be allowed to accept increased levels of risk…” So this is information a woman can use to make an informed decision if she is faced with a medical condition that requires sooner rather than later delivery of her baby, but not necessarily in the next 15 minutes.  To induce, have a cesarean, or wait for spontaneous labor when facing a true medical issue is a decision for the mom to make in conjunction with her supportive heath care provider based on the evidence of her risks, benefits, and options.

My point is, if you just read bits and pieces of the insert, or a few key quotes from an anti-induction article, you are going to miss the full story; much like how reading the full text of a study gives you context and details that you lack by just reading the abstract.  Read my article (4) for more information on inducing VBACs.

Yet, misinformation persists

Ok, so now you know that induction remains an option per the Pitocin insert, ACOG, and respect for patient autonomy.  Now check out these quotes, from the last couple days, from six different people. If I were to keep a list of comments like these, just referring to induction and VBAC for a month, I would literally have dozens if not hundreds.  Misinformation is rampant:

“pitocin is CONTRAINDICATED for vbac bc the risk of uterine rupture”

“I thought it was unsafe to use pitocin with a vbac.”

“vbac should never be induced!”

“It is unsafe for prev surgical births. It says so in the PDR, or at least it did.”

“Not supposed to induce with a VBAC.”

“Never never never have an induction, especially with any kind of vbac!! Oh my goodness. it drastically raises your chances of uterine rupture!! Holy toledo. If you don’t know the risks involved with inductions, especially in vbacs, don’t offer the advice! Smh. Pitocin is completely contraindicated for vbacs, I’m pretty sure it even says that on the insert.”

“Are you actually trying to argue that induction of labour on a VBAC is OK???WOW…that is not evidence based AT ALL. Every study that has been done comparing the two shows a clear rise in risk associated with induction of labour and rupture. I am ALL for choice no matter the case, but I think every women has a right to INFORMED choice and you clearly are not. UNLIKE.”

Note the tone of these comments.  There is no room for negotiation.  Do you get the sense that they are just referring to elective inductions or all inductions? The message I get from these comments is loud and clear: these individuals believe that VBACs should not be induced. Period.

“Well, I would choose an induction…”

What is especially ironic is that some women who speak this way in public, privately share with me, that they themselves would opt for an induction over a repeat cesarean. Though do you see room for that option in any of the comments above?  They preserve that choice for themselves and yet pound the party line that all induction is always wrong and publicly deny that option to other women… for what purpose?  To maintain ad nauseam that induction is an evil, evil thing? Yes, apparently that is the case.

The last person’s comment was in response to me sharing my article (4) and saying that induction with medical indication does and should remain an option for moms planing VBACs.  Her reply equates my actions of sharing this reality with advocating against informed choice. How is keeping women in the dark about their options supporting the notion of informed consent? That faulty logic deserves a capitalized “WOW” with excessive exclamation points.

This is not the first person to say something like this to me. People so staunchly (and incorrectly) maintain that VBACs should never be induced because they have been indoctrinated to believe that induction is always wrong, it always introduces more risks.

More risk than what?

But the key question is: More risk than what? That is always what women should ask.

More risk than having a fetal demise before labor, partial placental abruption, or serious uterine infection and remaining pregnant? OK, so let’s say that is the truth.

Then any time any scarred woman has any of those medical conditions as well as those listed in my article (4), and they agree that remaining pregnant has higher risks that delivering the baby, they should have a cesarean, right? Even if vaginal birth remains an option, albeit via an induced labor?  Even if baby needs to be born sooner rather than later, but not necessarily in the next 15 minutes?  Those moms shouldn’t have a choice, they shouldn’t have a say, they should just go straight to cesarean?  How is that preserving choice for women?

Don’t misrepresent the facts

That is what these (extreme) “induction is wrong” proponents don’t understand. Induction has its place, as does every other medical intervention, and if you want to go straight to cesarean, rather than having a medically-indicated induction, fine.

But don’t misrepresent the truth to other women.

Don’t misrepresent what ACOG (1) or the Pitocin insert (2) says.

Don’t misrepresent the risks of Pitocin by listing a mish-mash of complications with no rates.  (How are women to understand the risks if you don’t tell them how frequently those emergencies occur?)

Don’t say things that can be disproved with a single mouse click like inducing VBACs is against evidence based medicine.

Don’t undermine a woman’s legal right to autonomy (5) by perpetuating the myth, that all induction, including when medically indicated, is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Don’t dictate specific actions while withholding facts that would enable women to make their own decisions, even if they are different that what you would prefer.

Medically indicated induction = choice

People don’t appreciate that standing for medically indicated induction is standing for women to have a choice: induction vs. repeat cesarean. Without induction, there is no choice when a valid medical reason presents. By eliminating the option of induction, women are mandated to the increasing risks (6) of repeat cesarean. And yet people who persist in their agenda say things like this to me (naturally, the following was asserted after I shared my article (4) and they didn’t read it),

Does inducing a VBAC increase the chance of rupture??? YES. Does a women, and should a women have the right to choose that irregardless of that FACT??? YES. Is the most important thing informed consent?? I believe it is.

Clear language provides clarity

So if people think that, then they should use clear, unambiguous language like, “Induction remains an option when a medical indication presents” or “Elective induction isn’t worth the increased risks” rather than flat out declaring “pitocin is contraindicated” (false) and claiming that induction in a VBAC is not evidenced based (false) as this very commenter did earlier in the thread. If someone maintains that it should be a woman’s choice, then they should share substantiated facts, context, statistics, and references, not erroneous blanket statements.

Women can make informed decisions only when they are informed

To provide information supports choice and informed consent. To dictate a specific action while misrepresenting the evidence eliminates choice and prohibits informed consent . I do not dictate to other women what they should do (7).

If you read my article (4), you will see that I list the reasons for medically indicated induction as well as provide an extensive review of studies illustrating the increased risk of uterine rupture. I do this rather than simply saying, “the risk of rupture is higher and thus you shouldn’t do it” because providing facts with context puts the choice in the hands of the mom, rather than me (or anyone else) dictating to her what she should do.

Some women will accept that higher rate of rupture in order to have a vaginal birth. Others will choose to accept the risks of a repeat cesarean section. Those are choices for women to make for themselves based on facts, not on misrepresentations of what other women (incorrectly) think is contraindicated.

“Induction is wrong” & patient autonomy

People who advocate that “induction is always wrong” don’t understand the implications of their assertions. By arguing against inductions, which in the minds of many include medically indicated inductions since no distinction is made, they are effectively advocating for more cesareans and against informed consent and patient autonomy. The mission of VBAC Facts is to make hard-to-find, interesting, and pertinent information relative to post-cesarean birth options easily accessible to the people who seek it. I advocate for informed consent and patient autonomy and that is why I share evidence (4) rather than dictating what others should do. I only hope that this reasoning and evidence based position spreads because there are far to many people out there who persist in the inaccurate philosophy that inductions in a VBAC are always wrong even in the face of a valid medical reason. This does not support choice, women, or birth.

I profusely apologize for the excessive underlining in this article, but I think you will agree, that it was absolutely necessary.


1. Kamel, J. (2010, Jul 21). ACOG issues less restrictive VBAC guidelines. Retrieved from VBAC Facts:

2. JHP Pharmaceuticals LLC. (2012, Sept). Pitocin official FDA information, side effects and uses. Retrieved from

3. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2010). Practice Bulletin No. 115: Vaginal Birth After Previous Cesarean Delivery. Obstetrics and Gynecology , 116 (2), 450-463. Retrieved from Our Bodies Our Blog:

4. Kamel, J. (2012, May 27). Myth: VBACs should never be induced. Retrieved from VBAC Facts:

5. Kamel, J. (n.d.). Legal stuff. Retrieved from VBAC Facts:

6. Kamel, J. (2012, Dec 9). Why cesareans are a big deal to you, your wife, and your daughter. Retrieved from VBAC Facts:

7. Kamel, J. (2012, Dec 7). Some people think I’m anti-this/ pro-that: My advocacy style. Retrieved from VBAC Facts:


7 thoughts on “Induction is wrong, wrong, wrong… wait, what?

  1. Sandra Ibarra

    This post is older. But i have a question my doctor said she wouldnt let me go past my due date since im trying for a vbac. My first was a csection because he was breeched so i never went into labor. She also mention that if i go past my due date i would have to have a c section. Is it possible that i cancel my csection and just let nature take its course?

  2. jade

    Hi, I just had my first appointment with the high risk doctors and after exploring your website extensively, I was able to ask all the right questions and feel really comfortable with all their answers but 2.

    One of them was about a routine cannula (which I can refuse) but my main question is about his suggestion to have regular stretch and sweeps from 39 weeks “to widen my cervix” as it is thought that my fail to progress with my last was cause she got stuck (48hrs before emergency c-section) but I think it was stress.

    Anyway my midwife agrees that I should do it, but I just don’t understand why at 39 week’s. Won’t it potentially put me in early labor if my bub is not ready to come? And if they accidentally break my waters, would that not lead to further intervention?

    Thank you in advance for your help, I haven’t been able to find any advice about a stretch and sweep used more for the stretching side of things…

  3. venita garner

    wow… that was fabulous. it is also what happened with #4. I was so against induction but I was 37 weeks, bleeding bright red blood and after 8 hours, had no hard CTX that would bring about the baby’s birth, so we induced because I would rather induce than go c/s.

    we also induced out #6 because he had spent 3 weeks transverse breech and on the day of the app’t to make the c/s app’t, he turned. I was checking out and I said “hey.. could we get this baby out on induction before he turns around again”… I did NOT want a c/s so that elective induction was better than a c/s too.

    now we are facing VBAC with #10 and after #9 being born via emergency c/s, and my husband worries that I will stall again since I have been electively induced several times, he is worried I will end up c/s. I am happy to hear that it’s not a blanket absolutely written in stone no induction. I will be taking my homeopathy tablets with me but JIC am now better informed since everyone has been saying No induction.. and now I know what they should be saying is no voluntary, elective induction.

  4. Regine Marton CNM

    Although well argumented in favor of women’s automomy and freedom of choice,,,, I am still wondering why there are no other acredited sources than ACOG and the Pit insert ????? What about ACNM, MANA positions and … Cochrane conclusions??

    The question is not favoring VBACS at all cost IMO… This is how I see yur point of view,, Still Not convinced,,,,

    I know that this is beside the point but the conditions where i practice would be an obstacle anyway,,,, No Monitoring available…

    1. Jen Kamel Post author


      Thanks for your comment.

      I’m unclear on what you would need further accredited sources on. Do you want to know where ACNM, MANA, and Cochrane stand on inducing VBACs when medically indicated? This article was more about people misrepresenting/misunderstanding what ACOG and the Pitocin insert say which is why I focused on that. It’s not meant to be a comprehensive article on inducing VBACs as I already wrote extensively on the topic here. I would also be shocked if ACNM, MANA or Cochrane came out against medically-indicated induction for the very reason I list in the article – this would leave women with no option other than cesarean.

      For what it’s worth, here is what the ACNM says in their 2010 Position Paper on Induction of Labor which does not specify VBACs,

      Evidence-based medically indicated inductions of labor offer an opportunity to improve maternal and infant health outcomes when selected complications of pregnancy are present (Mozurkewich et al., 2009). Evidence-based medically indicated inductions of labor are generally considered within a risk-benefit decision making process, in which the risks of the medical condition worsening or causing harm are balanced against the risks of an induction of labor, including consideration of the gestational age of the fetus.

      I’m also unclear on what you are still not convinced over. The safety of inducing a VBAC? The medical reasons why it would be done? If it should remain a woman’s choice: induction vs. cesarean?

      I would think that many, if not all, of the reasons for a medically indicated induction would risk a woman out of out-of-hospital care. Inductions do belong in the hospital where proper monitoring can be used.



  5. Therese Hak-Kuhn

    As Executive Director of toLabor, the international certifying organization for birth doulas I applaud your writing. We teach the importance of our choice of words, leaving our agenda out, providing evidence-based research as the best way to guide a woman to make a truly informed decision. We do not opinionate! We stress that you must read ALL not just what supports your beliefs in order to be a truly effective advocate and activist for change. To be dogmatic, black-and-white in your attitude is dangerous. Too many in the world of birth work are just that and this is the problem on “both sides”, they are allowing their personal interpretation be the voice in their professional life. When it is about you and your baby, be informed, be opinionated but when it is about others, healthy and true informed consent is well-rounded and left to the individual to decide. Thank you.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *