Aargh!!! Can experienced mums or midwives tell me: if i'm 38+2 and the baby is not engaged yet...

[yousaidit]

... does that mean it's less likely to be early or on time and more likely to be late, or does whether or not it's engaged have no bearing on when it turns up? I'm fed up of feeling like a baby elephant is crippling me! Its my 2nd pg, dd was late, i want the baby to arrive now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

any hints tips or info greatly appreciated!!

[blinks]

don't mean nuffink...

[Thefearlessfreak]

My ds didn't engage at 40 weeks & I was told I'd be induced. He arrived one day over my due date...no problems at all!

[Flossish]

blinks is right!! Hopefully not being engaged means you aren't getting the shooting groin pains so try and enjoy your last elephanty weeks!!

[yousaidit]

Good, all helpful! Keep the stories comingf that give me hope!!!!

[belgo]

No the baby engaging doesn't indicate when it will be born at all! I'm 39 weeks pregnant and this baby has been engaged for at least 3 weeks and still no sign of labour. For some women the baby doesn't engage until labour.

[ajm200]

Second time babies often don't engage until labour starts so it's position shouldn't mean that it is going to be late.

[lara881]

ds1 was a week late. Ds2 was not even slightly engaged when I had a checkup at 39+5 - went into labour that night - he was born less than 24 hours later! Good luck.

[broodymom]

I agree with aim, i was told that with second or more babies the head sometimes doesnt engage as your pelvis is looser because you had a baby before.

[yousaidit]

thanks everyone for replying! I'm orf to quaff some orange juice and pineapple!