ever, I would disagree with them and instead say that there are even greater risks in not using the procedures when they are necessary. Being a child born of a cesarean section, I have not experienced any of the so-called “maternal disassociation.” Of course I may be an isolated incident, but I believe that it is immature and ignorant of the researchers to make such broad blanket statements about the effects of a procedure. Granted, there is a risk involved in these different procedures, just as there is risk involved in eating dinner. In fact, a woman would be more likely to choke on the hospital food after her pregnancy than to have her baby or her suffer any significant trauma. The research, though honest, is misleading. Though it must be conceded that on the topic of electronic fetal monitoring, the facts speak for themselves in saying that EFM is ineffective in all manners, when discussing cesarean sections and forceps deliveries, such statements cannot be made. In both cases, the alternative to the procedure is the death of the child and/or the mother. No procedure could have worse risks than that. More unfortunate that this realization is the fact that none of the researchers offered any reasonable alternatives nor stated that there were not any available. The closest one came was to mention an alternative to forceps deliveries, vacuum deliveries, which was just as dangerous to the child. If reasonable alternatives exist, then the researchers should at least mention them, if not discuss their effectiveness. If reasonable alternatives do not exist, the researchers should divulge this information as well. The only conclusions that can be drawn from the recent research are that medical procedures used during birth are dangerous, often ineffective, and, at this point, the best that medical science has to offer....
