The policies in place during the 90s when insurance companies were pushing VBAC were entirely unsafe. VBAC became required in some places and some women were not given a choice about whether or not to VBAC.
“It’s no wonder that the cesarean rate is going through the roof and women are seeking alternatives to hospital-based OB/GYN care in unprecedented numbers,” said Susan M. Jenkins, Legal Counsel of The Big Push for Midwives. “ACOG’s very own recommendations give its members permission to follow opinion-based practice guidelines that have far more to do with avoiding litigation than with adhering to scientific, evidence-based principles about what’s best for mothers and babies.”
I too wondered if I was crazy to plan a VBAC and that is when I started researching. I found that learning more about the risks and benefits of VBAC vs. repeat cesarean gave me a lot of peace.
Removing the “immediately available” standard while supporting VBAC with twins, after two prior cesareans, and with unknown scars is a huge step in the right direction. It seems that the option of VBAC is now available to hundreds of thousands of women, many of whom, up to this point, were left with no choice at all.
In an effort to bring the consumer perspective to the 2010 NIH VBAC Conference, Jennifer Kamel, Founder of VBAC Facts, asked women across America, “Why is the option of VBAC important to you?” This is what they said.
Q: Don’t hospitals ban VBAC because it is dangerous? A: They ban VBACs under the guise of patient safety. But patient safety is a euphemism for “we don’t have a good evidence-based reason to do it, other than we don’t want to get sued, it’s more expedient, and we make more money from c-sections—the hospital does, not necessarily the physician, but the hospital does—so we’re going to ban it because it’s easier for us, and we’re going to say it’s for patient safety because of the risk of rupturing the uterus.”