This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Larry W. Halverson, MD
Aurora, Mo

JAMA. 1985;254(5):611.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

I was pleased and enlightened by Dr Danforth's¹ excellent review article on cesarean section published in the Feb 8, 1985, issue of JAMA. Despite the excellence of the review, however, some omissions should be addressed.

The practice of repeated cesarean section has been assailed in the scientific literature. However, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) guidelines are so stringent that many hospitals cannot offer a trial of labor to a patient who has previously undergone a cesarean section. Our hospital, for example, has 55 beds and is without a 24-hour obstetrical nursing staff and a qualified anesthesiologist. In addition, no obstetricians are on the staff. As a family physician I have suggested to patients on whom we have performed a previous cesarean section that they go to a hospital that can offer them a trial of labor for their delivery. They usually refuse this offer . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?