I hear all the time how induction in VBAC is contraindicated. This is false. This is the kind of misinformation that materializes when we demonize all induction rather than specifying that elective inductions are not worth the increased risks.
It’s important to use clear, specific language when we talk about birth because there is a lot of confusion among moms, advocates, doulas, and health care providers about VBAC and induction. When I point out the lack of clarity many people have on the topic to “anti-induction advocates” (for the lack of a better term), they respond with the fact that their focus is warning moms about elective inductions, which is absolutely needed. And they genuinely believe that people are aware of the distinction between elective and medically-indicated inductions. However, that has not been my experience, in fact it’s been quite the opposite. There are many people who don’t understand the why, when, and how of inducing VBACs and that is impacting the abilities of women to make informed decisions and exercise their right of patient autonomy.
First, you can induce VBACs
To be clear, medically indicated induction in a VBAC is not contraindicated! Yet, many, many, many people persist that it is citing ACOG (1) and the Pitocin insert (2). ACOG clearly says in their latest VBAC guidelines (3) that “induction remains an option” in a mom planning a VBAC via Pitocin or Foley catheter. The Pitocin drug insert (2) does state, “Except in unusual circumstances, oxytocin [Pitocin] should not be administered in the following conditions” and then lists “previous major surgery on the cervix or uterus including cesarean section.” However, despite conventional wisdom, a prior cesarean is not listed under the contraindications section. Further, the drug insert recognizes the value of individualized care:
The decision [to use Pitocin in a woman with a prior cesarean] can be made only by carefully weighing the potential benefits which oxytocin can provide in a given case against rare but definite potential for the drug to produce hypertonicity or tetanic spasm.
This is in line with ACOG’s latest VBAC recommendations (3) where they say, “Respect for patient autonomy supports the concept that patients should be allowed to accept increased levels of risk…” So this is information a woman can use to make an informed decision if she is faced with a medical condition that requires sooner rather than later delivery of her baby, but not necessarily in the next 15 minutes. To induce, have a cesarean, or wait for spontaneous labor when facing a true medical issue is a decision for the mom to make in conjunction with her supportive heath care provider based on the evidence of her risks, benefits, and options.
My point is, if you just read bits and pieces of the insert, or a few key quotes from an anti-induction article, you are going to miss the full story; much like how reading the full text of a study gives you context and details that you lack by just reading the abstract. Read my article (4) for more information on inducing VBACs.
Yet, misinformation persists
Ok, so now you know that induction remains an option per the Pitocin insert, ACOG, and respect for patient autonomy. Now check out these quotes, from the last couple days, from six different people. If I were to keep a list of comments like these, just referring to induction and VBAC for a month, I would literally have dozens if not hundreds. Misinformation is rampant:
“pitocin is CONTRAINDICATED for vbac bc the risk of uterine rupture”
“I thought it was unsafe to use pitocin with a vbac.”
“vbac should never be induced!”
“It is unsafe for prev surgical births. It says so in the PDR, or at least it did.”
“Not supposed to induce with a VBAC.”
“Never never never have an induction, especially with any kind of vbac!! Oh my goodness. it drastically raises your chances of uterine rupture!! Holy toledo. If you don’t know the risks involved with inductions, especially in vbacs, don’t offer the advice! Smh. Pitocin is completely contraindicated for vbacs, I’m pretty sure it even says that on the insert.”
“Are you actually trying to argue that induction of labour on a VBAC is OK???WOW…that is not evidence based AT ALL. Every study that has been done comparing the two shows a clear rise in risk associated with induction of labour and rupture. I am ALL for choice no matter the case, but I think every women has a right to INFORMED choice and you clearly are not. UNLIKE.”
Note the tone of these comments. There is no room for negotiation. Do you get the sense that they are just referring to elective inductions or all inductions? The message I get from these comments is loud and clear: these individuals believe that VBACs should not be induced. Period.
“Well, I would choose an induction…”
What is especially ironic is that some women who speak this way in public, privately share with me, that they themselves would opt for an induction over a repeat cesarean. Though do you see room for that option in any of the comments above? They preserve that choice for themselves and yet pound the party line that all induction is always wrong and publicly deny that option to other women… for what purpose? To maintain ad nauseam that induction is an evil, evil thing? Yes, apparently that is the case.
The last person’s comment was in response to me sharing my article (4) and saying that induction with medical indication does and should remain an option for moms planing VBACs. Her reply equates my actions of sharing this reality with advocating against informed choice. How is keeping women in the dark about their options supporting the notion of informed consent? That faulty logic deserves a capitalized “WOW” with excessive exclamation points.
This is not the first person to say something like this to me. People so staunchly (and incorrectly) maintain that VBACs should never be induced because they have been indoctrinated to believe that induction is always wrong, it always introduces more risks.
More risk than what?
But the key question is: More risk than what? That is always what women should ask.
More risk than having a fetal demise before labor, partial placental abruption, or serious uterine infection and remaining pregnant? OK, so let’s say that is the truth.
Then any time any scarred woman has any of those medical conditions as well as those listed in my article (4), and they agree that remaining pregnant has higher risks that delivering the baby, they should have a cesarean, right? Even if vaginal birth remains an option, albeit via an induced labor? Even if baby needs to be born sooner rather than later, but not necessarily in the next 15 minutes? Those moms shouldn’t have a choice, they shouldn’t have a say, they should just go straight to cesarean? How is that preserving choice for women?
Don’t misrepresent the facts
That is what these (extreme) “induction is wrong” proponents don’t understand. Induction has its place, as does every other medical intervention, and if you want to go straight to cesarean, rather than having a medically-indicated induction, fine.
But don’t misrepresent the truth to other women.
Don’t misrepresent the risks of Pitocin by listing a mish-mash of complications with no rates. (How are women to understand the risks if you don’t tell them how frequently those emergencies occur?)
Don’t say things that can be disproved with a single mouse click like inducing VBACs is against evidence based medicine.
Don’t undermine a woman’s legal right to autonomy (5) by perpetuating the myth, that all induction, including when medically indicated, is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Don’t dictate specific actions while withholding facts that would enable women to make their own decisions, even if they are different that what you would prefer.
Medically indicated induction = choice
People don’t appreciate that standing for medically indicated induction is standing for women to have a choice: induction vs. repeat cesarean. Without induction, there is no choice when a valid medical reason presents. By eliminating the option of induction, women are mandated to the increasing risks (6) of repeat cesarean. And yet people who persist in their agenda say things like this to me (naturally, the following was asserted after I shared my article (4) and they didn’t read it),
Does inducing a VBAC increase the chance of rupture??? YES. Does a women, and should a women have the right to choose that irregardless of that FACT??? YES. Is the most important thing informed consent?? I believe it is.
Clear language provides clarity
So if people think that, then they should use clear, unambiguous language like, “Induction remains an option when a medical indication presents” or “Elective induction isn’t worth the increased risks” rather than flat out declaring “pitocin is contraindicated” (false) and claiming that induction in a VBAC is not evidenced based (false) as this very commenter did earlier in the thread. If someone maintains that it should be a woman’s choice, then they should share substantiated facts, context, statistics, and references, not erroneous blanket statements.
Women can make informed decisions only when they are informed
To provide information supports choice and informed consent. To dictate a specific action while misrepresenting the evidence eliminates choice and prohibits informed consent . I do not dictate to other women what they should do (7).
If you read my article (4), you will see that I list the reasons for medically indicated induction as well as provide an extensive review of studies illustrating the increased risk of uterine rupture. I do this rather than simply saying, “the risk of rupture is higher and thus you shouldn’t do it” because providing facts with context puts the choice in the hands of the mom, rather than me (or anyone else) dictating to her what she should do.
Some women will accept that higher rate of rupture in order to have a vaginal birth. Others will choose to accept the risks of a repeat cesarean section. Those are choices for women to make for themselves based on facts, not on misrepresentations of what other women (incorrectly) think is contraindicated.
“Induction is wrong” & patient autonomy
People who advocate that “induction is always wrong” don’t understand the implications of their assertions. By arguing against inductions, which in the minds of many include medically indicated inductions since no distinction is made, they are effectively advocating for more cesareans and against informed consent and patient autonomy. The mission of VBAC Facts is to make hard-to-find, interesting, and pertinent information relative to post-cesarean birth options easily accessible to the people who seek it. I advocate for informed consent and patient autonomy and that is why I share evidence (4) rather than dictating what others should do. I only hope that this reasoning and evidence based position spreads because there are far to many people out there who persist in the inaccurate philosophy that inductions in a VBAC are always wrong even in the face of a valid medical reason. This does not support choice, women, or birth.
I profusely apologize for the excessive underlining in this article, but I think you will agree, that it was absolutely necessary.
1. Kamel, J. (2010, Jul 21). ACOG issues less restrictive VBAC guidelines. Retrieved from VBAC Facts: http://www.vbacfacts.com/2010/07/21/acog-issues-less-restrictive-vbac-guidelines/
2. JHP Pharmaceuticals LLC. (2012, Sept). Pitocin official FDA information, side effects and uses. Retrieved from Drugs.com: http://www.drugs.com/pro/pitocin.html
3. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2010). Practice Bulletin No. 115: Vaginal Birth After Previous Cesarean Delivery. Obstetrics and Gynecology , 116 (2), 450-463. Retrieved from Our Bodies Our Blog: http://www.ourbodiesourblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/ACOG_guidelines_vbac_2010.pdf
4. Kamel, J. (2012, May 27). Myth: VBACs should never be induced. Retrieved from VBAC Facts: http://www.vbacfacts.com/2012/05/27/myth-vbacs-should-never-be-induced/
5. Kamel, J. (n.d.). Legal stuff. Retrieved from VBAC Facts: http://www.vbacfacts.com/category/vbac/legal-stuff
6. Kamel, J. (2012, Dec 9). Why cesareans are a big deal to you, your wife, and your daughter. Retrieved from VBAC Facts: http://www.vbacfacts.com/2012/12/09/why-cesareans-are-a-big-deal-to-you-your-wife-and-your-daughter/
7. Kamel, J. (2012, Dec 7). Some people think I’m anti-this/ pro-that: My advocacy style. Retrieved from VBAC Facts: http://www.vbacfacts.com/2012/12/07/some-people-think-im-anti-thispro-that-my-advocacy-style/
What do you think? Leave a comment.
Jen Kamel is the founder of VBAC Facts, an educational, training and consulting firm. As a nationally recognized VBAC strategist and consumer advocate, she has been invited to present Grand Rounds at hospitals, served as an expert witness in a legal proceeding, and has traveled the country educating hundreds of professionals and highly motivated parents. She speaks at national conferences and has worked as a legislative consultant in various states focusing on midwifery legislation and regulations. She has testified multiple times in front of the California Medical Board and legislative committees on the importance of VBAC access and is a board member for the California Association of Midwives.
Free Report Reveals...
Parents pregnant after a cesarean face so much misinformation about VBAC. As a result, many who are good VBAC candidates are coerced into repeat cesareans. This free report provides quick clarity on 5 uterine rupture myths so you can tell fact from fiction and avoid the bait & switch.
VBAC Facts does not provide any medical advice and the information provided should not be so construed or used. Nothing provided by VBAC Facts is intended to replace the services of a qualified physician or midwife or to be a substitute for medical advice of a qualified physician or midwife. You should not rely on anything provided by VBAC Facts and you should consult a qualified health care professional in all matters relating to your health.