Yahoo Lifestyle Private doctors criticised on birth intervention rate
The study examined women between 2000 and 2008 who were giving birth privately, were not pre-term or overdue and carried babies of normal weight. The findings suggest that there does not appear to be any obvious benefit for these women and babies to receive a higher level of intervention.
"We looked at the healthiest, wealthiest population possible, exploding some of the myths out there that women receiving these interventions are sicker," said Professor Hannah Dahlen, the leader of the study and a professor of midwifery at the University of Western Sydney.
In fact, this medical over-servicing has its ramifications: those giving birth privately were found to have a 20 per cent lower chance of having their first child through normal vaginal delivery
RELATED: The Process of Labour
Dr Dahlen said that obstetricians highly trained in dealing with complications were overseeing the care of low-risk women.
"A recent Queensland study surveyed women to see if those in private hospitals were more likely to request a caesarean section but found there were no difference," she said.
"Women need to be informed that intervention in childbirth is no walk in the park, with caesarean sections, for example, potentially causing a scarred uterus, which can increase the risk of complications in future pregnancies."
Obstetricians have suggested that women in private hospitals are more ‘risk adverse’ which could influence the findings.
