what did they do a long, long time ago when?

Question

there was no c-section? how did the baby get out? did they just die with the mother? that's so sad...but at least they both went to heaven right? sorry, i'm rambling.

Answer 1

No...no rambling here as you ask some valid questions.

Vaginal birth has its pro's and con's.
The problem with C-section is that it is too easy and doctors can add additional charges to the patients' bill.

Speaking of heaven...our knowledge of medicine has increased the chance that more babies will be born.
The problem lies within the fact that some babies are NOT suppose to be born...that's why some women will have miscarriages.
It's natures (or God's, depending on your point-of-view) way of saying: this baby wasn't ready to survive outside the womb.

Now, we have women (often teen mothers) birthing pre-mature infants that need extensive care and connected to life-support systems.

These "premies" will suffer a lot.
First, many of their internal organs were not fully developed.
Second, many of the drugs used to keep them alive will cause a variety of problems, from hearing loss to blindness, etc...

What is sad, really sad, is that some parents can't let go.
They seem to believe that ALL life must survive, at all costs.
But the quality of life for these infants isn't good.
And we tend to let our emotions overcome our logic.

Answer 2

Pretty much - although c-sectioning has been performed for a very long time, so obviously without anaesthetic. And not too many women survived this for too long.

Childbirth may be the most natural thing in the world but up until about 85 years ago, pregnancy and childbirth was still a very dangerous process for a lot of women - the number 1 cause of death for women in fact.

Since medical "intervention" it has become outstandingly safer for mother and child, however some people out there still deeply mistrust obstetric medicine, which is a shame.

Answer 3

"Cesarean section has been part of human culture since ancient times and there are tales in both Western and non-Western cultures of this procedure resulting in live mothers and offspring."

"Despite rare references to the operation on living women, the initial purpose was essentially to retrieve the infant from a dead or dying mother; this was conducted either in the rather vain hope of saving the baby's life, or as commonly required by religious edicts, so the infant might be buried separately from the mother. Above all it was a measure of last resort, and the operation was not intended to preserve the mother's life. It was not until the nineteenth century that such a possibility really came within the grasp of the medical profession."

Answer 4

They would usually die in childbirth. Having a baby was one of the most dangerous things you could do before c-sections. No wonder so many women died in their teens and twenties!

They also invented forceps for difficult births, although many times the forceps would do alot of damage.

Answer 5

That is a really good question. I'm guessing that the mother & child both die, or one of them die. It is very sad to think about.

Answer 6

Yes they would have both died probably although cutting into a mothers womb to get the baby out has been done for many thousands of years....

Answer 7

Usually, when there was no c-section, the mother and child usually died in childbirth. It was not uncommon. There was no ultrasound for them to know what was happening with the child inside the mother.

Answer 8

That would have been a LONG time ago, as they say either Julius, or Agustus Caesar(I forget which one) was the inspiration for the name of that technique, as he was born that way.

Answer 9

They probably just cut them out .. without pain meds and anistecia (sp?) .. eek! sure glad I'm having mine in 2007! :)

God bless!

Answer 10

I dunno? I guess both died or the mom died and they cut the baby out once she was gone. Thats horrible right? Thank God for doctors and nurses!!!