Abstract
In modern obstetrics, we find few topics that would be as controversial as giving birth to a woman after a caesarean section. It has long been believed that a scar on the uterus is, due to the risk of rupture, a contraindication to spontaneous delivery.
As early as 1916, from today's point of view, Edwin Cragin certainly formulated an overly cautious recommendation that "one caesarean section, always a caesarean section." However, we must not forget that this was at a time when only about 1% of mothers had a caesarean section and it was almost always a failed birth lasting for several days, often in women with a Srachitic basin (rickets were not rare at the beginning of the 20th century. industrialized countries), oxytocin was not available and abdominal surgery and general anesthesia were relatively risky. Thus, the obstetrician resorted to a caesarean section to save the lives of an exhausted, dehydrated, often feverish woman raging on the verge of death.
The mothers who survived the caesarean section at that time were certainly not suitable candidates for vaginal guidance during the next birth. At that time, there was no other than a "classic" cervicocorporeal incision.