This article about an upcoming study being carried out in Australia is well worth a read, and this is the comment I've written:
I'm curious. Is the author of this (most welcome) article about the need for greater clarity, in the comparison of risks and benefits of planned maternal request cesareans versus planned vaginal births, the same Stephen Robson that co-authored this in 2003?
Should obstetricians support a 'term cephalic trial'?
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2003 Oct;43(5):341-3.
I am co-author of an upcoming book on the very subject of "Choosing a Cesarean", and while Dr. Magnus Murphy and I believe that there is already sufficient evidence to support the legitimacy of prophylactic surgery, we agree that further studies, which SPECIFICALLY compare maternal request surgery with other birth plans and outcomes, without bias, can only help to inform the ongoing debate and controversy that surrounds this birth choice.