trustme.bro/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim
Severe perineal tears in a first birth indicate a C-section for subsequent births
the verdict
REFUTED
the evidence says no
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
0 sources for · 5 against

Current clinical guidelines and studies show that a history of severe perineal tears (OASIs) does not mandate a routine C-section for subsequent births; rather, subsequent vaginal delivery remains a safe and viable option following appropriate counseling and risk assessment.

Evidence against · 5
2018 · cited by 59
This study evaluates women following a recommended protocol for subsequent vaginal delivery after OASIs and finds no significant worsening of anorectal symptoms.
See more details
The analysis

The claim states that severe perineal tears in a first birth indicate a C-section for subsequent births. Multiple systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and clinical guideline papers (such as [5], [7], [8], and [11]) explicitly refute the idea that a C-section is strictly indicated or mandatory. Instead, they demonstrate that subsequent vaginal delivery is a safe, viable option with low recurrence rates when accompanied by proper counseling and standardized protocols, and that mode of delivery does not automatically dictate worsening pelvic floor outcomes. Therefore, the evidence clearly refutes the claim.

More against · 4
2025 · cited by 3
This meta-analysis concludes that the risk of new onset or worsening of anal incontinence is not strictly associated with the mode of the second delivery.
2025 · cited by 2
This review highlights that there are no absolute contraindications to subsequent vaginal delivery after prior OASI, and appropriate counseling permits shared decision-making rather than mandating a C-section.
2025 · cited by 1
This cohort study demonstrates that subsequent vaginal delivery is successful and has a low recurrence rate of OASI when chosen after proper counseling.
2026 · cited by 0
This review notes that while severe perineal lacerations present a clinical dilemma, subsequent delivery planning involves personalized counseling and does not automatically dictate a mandatory C-section.
The paper trail · every fact has a biography
first checked04 Aug 2026
judged → REFUTED · 1104 Aug 2026
This receipt carries no identity, shared or not. Sharing publishes your connection to it, not your data.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.
This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt