Breech to Cephalic: How did you get your baby to turn before delivery time?

[TwilightSurfer]

Breech to Cephalic: How did you get your baby to turn before delivery time?

I am currently only 29+2. Baby is breech and facing foward.

Would like to hear stories from those who have experienced successfully turning baby to the proper position for vaginal delivery. How did you do it? When did it happen? Any and all details, please. THANK YOU!

[CaptainCaveman]

Thanks TS for posting

Am also currently housing a breech bubba at 29+1. Ds was born by cs because he was breech too. This one is in exactly the same position and has stayed put since at least the 20 week scan. Ds was breech from 20 week scan too.

Hoping for a VBAC but obv not if stays breech. Your stories, tips etc as TS says will be very much appreciated.

[TwilightSurfer]

I DON'T WANT A CSEC!!! Oddly I was prepared to have one if necessary with DD1 but I did so well I want to deliver naturally AGAIN!! I am really hoping I get a few positive ideas/stories to take with me to the doc next Monday.

[Tangle]

Then don't have one! If you talk to experienced midwives, breech is a perfectly "proper" position for a vaginal birth - just a little unusual .

DD was palpated as breech from about 28 weeks and stubbornly refused to move. She was born at home as a breech baby at 41+3 with IMs.

Try and get hold of a copy of "Breech Birth" by Benna Waites and/or "Breech Birth: What are my options" by Jane Evans: I felt they gave a far more balanced and evidence based view of the ways of birthing breech babies, along with the pros and cons of different methods. The Benna Waites book also has a chapter on complementary ways to encourage breech babies to turn (incl. accupuncture, moxibustion, chiropathy [sp?] and optimal foetal positioning).

Your Dr really shouldn't be worrying too much about position yet, though. Officially they're not even meant to mention till something like 36 weeks as so many babies will turn by then with no intervention at all. Personally, though, I'd rather have a heads up around the 30 week mark so I've got a chance of doing something about it and do my own research as to the options.

[dinkyboysmum]

i went to antenatal classes with a hippy lady, she gave me some chime bells when ds was breech at 28 wks. you cling them togetehr at the bottom of your bump, then keep clinging them as you move round the bump to the top iykwim. the baby is 'suppose' to move with the bells (yeah right!). was also told to massage in circular movemenet and spend more of my time leaning forward, instead of slouching back in the sofa. anyway, somewhere along the line he turned and managed natural delivery. maybe it was the bells?? worth a go?!

[TwilightSurfer]

Thank you Tangle. I'll check those reads out. Doc isn't worried at all but I, like you, feel better knowing now and having the opportunity to work with the situation before 36 weeks.

[TwilightSurfer]

Dinky, I like the bells idea.

[Tangle]

some people swear you can "attract" the baby to turn head down by playing music, shining lights or getting your DH to talk near where you want the head to be. A slightly less sympathetic one is sitting in a warm bath with a packet of frozen peas on its head! Or if you're feeling acrobatic, doing handstands in a swimming pool.

You could also google Mary Cronk

[TwilightSurfer]

Some ladies on my due thread laughed at me for the radio between the legs idea...tried it for the first time over the weekend. Hey if it works....I'm going for it.

[TwilightSurfer]

bump

[jessikart]

DS was transverse until 38+6(born at 39+2), and I still have no idea what got him to turn (sorry!). I just followed all the advice about not letting your knees get higher than your hips etc and he did it in his own time. He was a very active bump though (quite uncomfortable at times) and I think he just kept flipping and turning until he was ready.

My SIl was pregnant at the same time and her DS was a frank breech who would NOT turn! We had the same midwife but for some reason SIL was booked in for manipulation, reflexology etc which was never mentioned to me.

I think just try any and every thing that might work - there doesn't seem to be much reason or rhyme to it!

[TinkerbellesMum]

I never got there, she decided to stretch hers legs out of the womb at 31 weeks
(went into labour with footling presentation).

Try getting Daddy to talk to bump near your public bone as baby will move towards the sound of Daddy's voice. You can do the same with headphones.

Handstands in the water are supposed to help

Sitting on the sofa the wrong way, feet in the air, IYSWIM.

Ice packs on your ribs (great when baby is pressing into your lungs, just don't fall asleep with it there for 4 hours )

If all else fails, you are "tested" and you said it went well last time, so ask for a breech trial. They're not supposed to turn you down if you ask and you are not untested. And remember above all else, babies do turn in labour.

[TinkerbellesMum]

Oh and you can only have a trial if it is a standard presentation, anything other than a bum and they won't want you to deliver it.

[ready4anothercoffee]

There is an acupuncture/pressure point on the outside of your little toe at the base which is supposed to encourage turning.

Worked for me with dd2 - spent sun rubbing my feet together whenever I remembered, she spent the mon turning

otherwise get on your hands and knees and scrub those floors

[mummy2bsoon]

i tink mien is breech, i dunno actually.. it jus moves alot...cnt stay in one position

[Tangle]

At the end of the day, they cannot decide how to deliver your baby - they can advise, they can make recommendations, but is not for them to "tell" or "let" or "allow" (as long as you are a mentally competent adult, of course ).

Having been through it, my conclusion was that a lot of the NHS's recommendations were made off the back of poor quality research, or from annecdote rather than evidence. I did not feel that I was presented with options within the NHS that were based on good science. I've since got more beligerent and, if I were there again now, I'd push the hands-off, midwife-led version much more strongly - they'll most likely use the "but we don't have experienced midwives" line, which raises two big questions: "so what happens to the undiagnosed breeches?" and "how is your staff training my problem?" (I did hear of one lady that got her PCT to pay for an IM experienced in breech birth as they didn't have the skills in house). At the time though I didn't want the hassle and DD being breech was one reason we turned to IMs.

There are risks associated with birth, full stop - end of story. A CS is not necessarily a lower risk way of bringing a breech baby into the world, there are just different risks to a vaginal breech birth. The risk comparison table would change depending on exact presentation and gestation, amongst others. At the end of the day, you need to make a decision that is right for you as an individual, taking your family and the care options available to you into consideration.

[ohmeohmy]

Have a look at www.spinningbabies.com the mexican way of using a rebozo (sort of scarf) to jiggle the belly or lift he baby a little out of the pelvis is apparently very good.

[TinkerbellesMum]

Tangle, they didn't force me to have a section, they didn't tell me that to have a natural birth would squash her brain and permanently damage her (I didn't need to know at the time I was in a bad enough state, I found out on here only recently how bad it would have been). But I knew that they were serious, things weren't right and she needed out quickly, safely and controlled.

If you are telling them you want to do something they believe would be dangerous, they don't have to keep you on their books. On the whole I would go with the idea that it's your choice and they can't push you into a section, but there are times when it would be very unwise to not agree with them. An untested mother would be potentially putting herself and her baby at risk, as would trying to deliver anything other than frank or complete breeches. Frank breech has a similar outcome in trials as head down, complete breech has the risk of becoming footling. If a baby is presenting a knee or foot (or shoulder) then to carry on could seriously damage the baby. Certainly if I had gone to term and Tink hadn't turned I was quite happy to deliver her naturally as I had a fairly easy delivery the first time, but I could see that footling and rapid progression with a preterm baby was not something they comfortable with.

[Tangle]

TinkerbellesMum - I'm sorry if I offended, it wasn't my intent. If I'd been in your situation I'd have done exactly the same thing and I completely agree that a pre-term footling breech is not a good vaginal birth candidate.

I'm not trying to say that all women carrying breech should have a vaginal birth, and emergency situations will almost always necessitate a change in plans. I'm just trying to make women aware that vaginal birth of breech babies is an option that they might want to consider that can be as safe as a CS.

The framework I was given by MWs was that the baby should be full term and normally developed, labour should start spontaneously and progress naturally. If any of those things had failed to happen my MWs would have been strongly recommending a CS and I'd have been taking their advice whilst being very grateful it was an option. The vaginal birth breech babies that tend to run into problems are those that are interferred with. Yes, there are always risks that can't be entirely eliminated, but there are risks in any birth.

In an ideal world medical professionals would make recommendations on the basis of good research, tailored to the individual's circumstances. My experience, which seems to tie in with the experience of a lot of other women, is that obstetric medical advice often seems to be based on annecdote and hospital protocol - even when there is evidence to sugest that that advice is NOT linked to improved outcomes for mothers and/or babies. My experience was that pracitioners within the NHS did not give me all the information I needed to make an informed decision on how to birth my breech baby, and I felt the information they did give was presented in a way to make a CS the only logical choice. Listening to other women with breech babies, my experience doesn't seem unusual. The type of hands-off, vaginal birth I had wasn't mentioned at all by the registrar I saw, even when I explicitly asked about vaginal birth - if I wasn't told, why should I assume that other women have been?

I don't understand why being a primip increases the risk. I'd also be interested to know which trials compared outcomes for different presentations - I know that footling is more risky thank frank, is more risky than full breech - but I don't recall ever seeing a comparison of how much more and I'd be interested to.

I also suspect you'd have to go a long way past insisting on a vaginal birth of a breech, term baby before the hospital would kick you out - making you sign a disclaimer, maybe, but the legal implications of denying care would be so massive they wouldn't do it. Are they even legally allowed to? I know midwives have a duty of care to women in labour.

[Tangle]

(sorry for the essay )

[elerose]

Hello my baby was breech at 34 weeks I was told that bouncing on a exercise/birth ball would help turn baby so I did (it was also more comfy to sit on when I was watching TV). Anyway my baby turned at 36 weeks don't know if it was the bouncing that did it but I was so scared of a breech delivery because of traumatic birth with dd1 I was willing to try anything.

[TwilightSurfer]

Elerose, it just so happens I pulled out my birthing ball today wondering if that would help. It's not as comfortable breech as it was with DD1 who was in a "normal" position. It's worth a shot to keep using it while TV viewing. Thanks!

[TinkerbellesMum]

I wasn't offended I think we're saying the same thing. I just worry when people say that it is totally the mothers decision. I agree that hospitals are in too much of a rush with a straight forward breech to get mum in for a section, but there are times when it is necessary.

I've just been corrected by Mum. She had a mother who refused a section and induction, there was nothing could be done, not even a disclaimer, it was just recorded in her notes. The baby died from it's injuries. The only reason social services were involved was because they already were, the mother thought it was an attempt to get at her baby.

Frank breech is safest as the legs by the head protects it from the cervix closing around the neck. As long as it is hands off there is no more risk than a normal birth.

Complete breech - fetal position - is next safest. The feet will either go down and change it into a footling (bad) or go up so that it is frank (good)

Anything else presenting will put the baby at risk. With a footling the head can get caught as the cervix closes around the neck as the shoulders pass through. A knee will have similar implications to a foot and a hip means they're not in position.

[Divvy]

Tinkerbellesmum - I never got there, she decided to stretch hers legs out of the womb at 31 weeks
(went into labour with footling presentation).

What does this mean, as asked on another breech thread about whether the baby can break waters with a foot?

Is that what happened to you?

[Tangle]

TM - I think you're right and we're pretty well on the same hymn sheet.

Interestingly, though, I was given a different version of the risks - talking to midwives with a lot of experience in hands-off breech births, they can come up with no cases where the head got caught (for a full term baby, spontaneous unaugmented labour that wasn't interfered with at all). None, either in their personal experience or in the experience of their colleagues around the world. I was under the impression the bigger risk was from cord prolapse - frank breech allows the buttocks to form a nice tight plug, very comparable with a head, whereas if a leg is presenting there's more gaps for the cord to try and escape through.

No wonder women get confused

[TinkerbellesMum]

Yes, you are right, I forgot about that one too. I started this thread at home where I did some quick googling and finished at home typing from memory.

I don't know, I think it's just a coincidence tbh that she came feet first. Or rather it's the other way around - she came feet first because she was so early.

I delivered her sister at 20 weeks following 27 hours of natural labour - misdiagnosed as a UTI - after my body/placenta wasn't able to sustain the pregnancy anymore (she was a healthy baby and born alive). So although I was treated to make sure I could carry they think my body can't handle going to term after that which is why I went into labour.

I have a little guilt over falling asleep with an icepack on my ribs a couple of days before. It moved her down out of my lungs and I worry that the pressure of a breech baby (who tend to carry higher) on my cervix caused it, but I think I may probably just looking for ways to blame myself