ChatterBank2 mins ago
News - Should women pay for Epidurals?
Just heard on the news that women who request Epidurals for labour pain relief, should be charged for them.
Apparently Epidurals cost the NHS approx �500 each time one is administered.
What do you think?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by smudge. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
how utterly f****** ridiculous. What happened to "free at the point of administration". These half wits should be put through a forced labour without one, see how they get on. Good god, the very idea of what might happen to those who couldn't afford it.......it's like the Dark Ages all over again. Let's just squat in the corner and try not to disturb the men folk, shall we????
Absolute B*ll*cks, severe pain has been proven to cause trauma and permanent psychological effects, it's basically blackmail:
Doctor: You seem to be in a lot of discomfort would you like an epidural?
Woman in labour: Yes please Doctor.
Doctor: That'll be �500 please.
Woman in Labour: I can't afford that
Doctor: You stay sane or you stay in pain, your shout
Woman: I don't have the money
Doctor: Thats ok there's a junkie in the next ward who needs a new kidney, i'll take one of yours and we'll call it square.
This country is slowly becoming America's 51st state by the day
They may as well charge for childbirth in it's entirety then ~ which would be mega expensive if you have a c section as that is twice the amount of a natural birth.
It's all complete tosh. If childbirth is 'free' on the NHS then the pain relief should be too...and I say this as a woman who had no pain relief at all during labour (& I'm not bragging, honest..it blimmin well hurt!).
I think if women have to pay for epidurals (daresay it was a man who crossed the t's and dotted the i's on this) then its only fair their partners have their genitals in an iron vice for the whole period of the labour.Just a lick of water for their dry lips and no food because they would only be sick and no nipping out for a fag either.
They would enjoy their cup of tea and bit of toast once it was over though - I did!!!
Sorry I'm obviously not anti men-that was tonque in cheek but the point I was making was if it were men would we be discussing this?
Queen Victoria wanted an anaesthetic before giving birth. Religious leaders were outraged, pointing out that the Bible says 'In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children' - ie women are supposed to suffer. However, Prince Albert pointed out that God Himself put Adam to sleep before creating Eve out of his rib, and that settled the matter in his wife's favour.
Is this for everyone because I have heard of female friends who just want one straight away. As the midwife has stay with you all the time once you have had one administered i know it stretches the units. This will never come in.
I had one with my first but only after 27 hrs and went drug free second time round and i screamed the place down and was thoroughly traumatised after, i got over it at some point soon though.
LOL @ Goodsoulette.
I was only 19 hrs with my first and had an epidural.
Didnt have a thing with my second -not even gas and air and it was excrutiating.I was roaring for an epidural and I think when I bit the doctors wrist (which just happened to be handy) during one contraction he readily agreed.The needle was in my back when she appeared.She couldnt even give me a minutes respite and hasnt to this day:)
As a mere non marble peeing male here I think it is an outrageous idea. Whilst I know childbirth is not a disease, pain relief, however expensive, is not usually withheld from the sufferer in other circumstances.
Try having a tooth out without the Novocaine, tell the post-operative patient that their pain is natural and should be enjoyed as "part of the process", or tell the Health Secretary that here's no need for chemicals when tearing out their ingrowing toenail. "No gain without pain, eh Minister?"
I think it is an outrageous suggestion. Everyone knows, it has been proved, that factors that reduce the administration of epidurals are giving birth in familiar surroundings, at home, with a known and trusted midwife who has been looking after you throughout- the very things they don't give you because guess? They are expensive! In my case I had an epidural because the midwives insisted I had to lie flat on my back to make it easier for them to "check me". I was alright on all fours without an epidural but as soon as I tried to lie down I jumped to the ceiling like a spring with the pain. All the books I read at the time said it is entirely possible to "check" the mother while she is on all fours if that's how she is confortable but it was too much trouble for my lot... So I had an epidural, and subsequent "cascade of intervention" just because the midwives could not be bothered to check me while I was on all fours! Once upon a time women did not have epidurals, but then, nor did they have syntocin drips which are well known to cause much more painful contractions.
This is a suggestion by the Royal College of Midwives.
Their thinking does not appear to be financial but appears to be that giving epidurals increases the likelyhood of further interventions such as caesarians or foreceps deliveries.
Personally I think this is "Alice in Wonderland logic" I can't imagine sugical teams scrubbing up because the mother is already anaethetised and "it's a shame to waste it!"
I think it smells of a political ""in-house" squabble between Obstetricians and midwives breaking out into the media on a slow news day
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.