Recently, the New York Times published an investigation about whether there are too many C-Sections performed in the U.S. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/06/health/electronic-fetal-monitoring-c-sections.html

According to the Times, “[n]early every woman who gives birth in an American hospital is strapped with a belt of sensors to track the baby's heartbeat. If the pattern is deemed abnormal—too slow, for example—doctors often call for an emergency C-section.”

However, the article asserted that fetal monitoring “rarely helps baby or mother.” Further, “[d]ecades of research have shown that the tool does not reliably predict fetal distress. In fact, experts say, it leads to many unnecessary surgeries as doctors overreact to its ever-changing readouts.”

One out of three deliveries in the U.S. results from C-Sections, which the Times says “far exceeds public health recommendations.” The article points out that C-Sections prolong a woman's recovery, complicate future births and sometimes risk her life.

I find the Times article faulty. First, it appears that the sources for the articles are physicians who are often involved in medical malpractice litigation retained by the defense side. The defense in such cases is often that C-Section is unnecessary.

Moreover, fetal monitoring is an important tool—not the only tool—in evaluating the health and well-being of a fetus. It can and does save lives and prevent devastating heath consequences. The fact that many babies turn out fine does not mean the technology is bad or should not have been used.

Fetal monitoring provides important data that cannot be ignored. It tells doctors whether the fetus has good vital signs and adequate oxygen.

Though the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) advocates reducing C-Sections, ACOG emphasizes safety. ACOG advises that “[c]esarean birth, when indicated, plays a crucial role in ensuring maternal and neonatal safety but also is associated with higher risks of maternal morbidity and mortality compared with vaginal births.”  https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/committee-statement/articles/2025/04/quality-improvement-strategies-for-safe-reduction-of-primary-cesarean-birth

Certainly, the key is balancing the risks. When the fetal monitor (and perhaps other data from physical examination and/or lab data) demonstrates real risk to the fetus, the obvious answer is often to deliver immediately via C-Section.  Doing so can prevent fetal death or profound health consequences for both baby and mother.

It would be a mistake to mindlessly reduce C-Sections just for the sake of doing so. Each circumstance must dictate what is best and safest for mother and baby.