I've heard that tearing naturally is better than getting an episiotomy, what do you all think?…

I had a episiotomy with my son... ended up with 4 layers of stitches..

I was all natural with my first born. heal lot fast too.

I didn't have an episiotomy with my daughter. I have heard the same thing about it being worse if you get one

We were taught in school that sometimes they might cut the anal muscle by mistake since it's so close so they rather you tear

I didn't get cut even tho my Dr thought I should. I didn't tear on the outside but just enough on the inside to have 2 stitches. I healed a lot quicker than what my Dr said I would have if he cut me.

Tearing naturally is better because there are too many risks to episiotomies. They can be medically necessary but the ACOG recommends avoiding it. They can cause you to become incompetent permanently and it takes longer to heal, especially if the doctor cuts too much or too deep because some doctors seem to think its necessary to cut through the muscle when tearing naturally is less trauma and can leave you with just and itty bitty tear compared to what seems like an incision...

I've heard its best too be cut if you're tearing badly. By my own doctor, my dad who is a doctor, and by my sister in law who is a nurse and has two of her own children. She tore naturally with her first and with her second got cut and they had to fix her vaginal skin from her first birth the second time. Because with a tear it can go any which way. With a doctor cutting it they can stitch it up and make it look a lot better and should heal better. And not to mention if you don't trust your doctor enough to cut you down there, then you really shouldn't of stuck with that doctor in the first place...haha.