How was your 2nd C-Section compared to your 1st?

I've only had 1 c section, but I'm pushing for a vbac next time around. My reasoning is: labor is better for baby, even if it ends in another c section, labor helps prepare baby for life on the outside, cs babies have higher likelihood of breathing issues, the risk of infant or maternal injury and death is higher with a repeat c section, meanwhile the risk of uterine rupture is still less than 1%, recovery from a cs is hard enough without having a newborn AND a toddler, and (for me, at least) the emotional recovery after a cs was unbearable. You have to decide what's right for you though. Having a planned rcs is supposed to be a lot easier since you pretty much know what to expect. Finding a Dr who truly believes in vbac can be challenging and that can add a lot of stress, which a pregnant mom probably doesn't need. Choosing a rcs could be what you are more comfortable with. In my opinion though, a rcs shouldn't really be done unless mom or baby has a medical need for it. That's just me though. Whatever you decide, you are the only one who has to live with that decision, so you are the only one who needs to be comfortable with it.

It was okay, I guess. It wasn't planned, really. We decided my pre-e was no longer manageable by medication so we needed to either induce or deliver my baby via c/s. My doctor really wanted me to consider an induction but I was 35w, confined to the bed with a foley catheter, and closed tight and long. I was a horrible candidate for a VBAC induction. So I went for the repeat c/s.

I'll break it down. Cons: my baby needed to be resuscitated after birth. His apgar score was a 4 the first time, then an 8. He spent four hours in the stepped-down nursery right after birth. I wanted this to be the result of the magnesium sulfate I had been on for about a day, but they said no, it was the fluid in his lungs from having been born by c-section. Dang, there goes the mommy guilt. I didn't get to nurse him during that time, and he didn't have a good nursing session until almost eight hours after he was born. He didn't nurse well until he was about three weeks old, which was frustrating and disheartening. Although, I don't know how much of that was his prematurity and how much of it was the c-section. As for me, it was just another surgery I got the joy of recovering from, NOT! The surgery was much longer than my first (the first one was about 15-20 minutes long, the second was nearly an hour). I had some issues the next day with pain management, I had to get more percoset than they had prescribed me. Then of course I had to deal with the residual pain from the surgery, only this time I had an almost-three-year-old to contend with instead of just a tiny baby.

Pros: I recovered quicker this time. I knew what to expect, and I think I felt better about it having been my decision. Having the c-section cut down on the time my baby would be exposed to the mag via the placenta (this can have horrible effects on babies in utero, but does not pass through milk so it's not an issue when nursing). It also eliminated the practical guarantee that I would have a horribly long and hard labor that would almost inevitably end in a c-section anyway.

Would I do it again? Not unless I had to.