Has anyone gone more than 2 weeks overdue?(27 Posts)
Hi please help me. This is my first mumsnet post and I'm really hoping someone can help. I am 41 + 4 with my 2nd child. I had a c-section last time but am trying for VBAC this time.
I am currently booked for a section at 42 weeks but the more I think about this the more unhappy I am about it. Is it really so awful to be over 2 weeks late? DS arrived at 42 weeks so I seemingly cook my babies a bit longer than average.
Has anyone gone against the norm and just waited for their baby to arrive when its ready?
I would not wait. If I were you, I would be asking for an induction. I know that is probably an unpopular view, but most of the people I have known to have stillbirths it has happened after the baby was due.
Don't mean to scare you, just wanted to give you my opinion.
I have had a couple of clients that always go overdue. I do beleive it is genetic for some people to always go over, if you know it runs in the family. I had a client whose two DD were both born at 43 weeks, second was a homebirth, we negotiated local support from the hospital as her mother and grandmother always had long gestations too.
Selina, maybe your client ovulates later in the month?
I was induced at 41 + 5 with DS2, induction took 2 days so gave birth at 42 weeks. Average size baby, normal delivery. However midwife said that when she examined placenta it looked like a placenta they would see from a smoker and this can be the case in overdue babies the placenta stops to work as well and there is a higher risk of it coming away from the uterine wall a massive risk to baby. DS1 was induced at 39 weeks due to medical reasons so unsure if I would have been late with him.
People do wait and resist induction - I'm a doula and my colleagues share plenty of stories of birth after 42 weeks.
Here's a good list of links about induction:
The Induction booklet, which can be ordered from www.aims.org.uk and emailed to you is also really helpful.
In the end it is about balancing the risks associated with waiting with the risks associated with induction - only you can decide what's best for you.
I went to 42+5 with my second baby before reluctantly agreeing to induction. He was definitely properly late - I know when he was conceived, and by my dates he was actually a day later. He was huge, 10lb, and had the most enormous placenta (in really good condition strangely).
He was OP and we think thats why he was so late - his head didn't drop so there was no pressure on my cervix to trigger labour - do you know what position your baby is in at all?
We just took it day by day and didn't agree to anything until I really felt it was time to concede defeat, as it were. There is a history of late babies in our family - my aunt had her DD at 43 weeks, my brothers were both born at 41+5.
However that was after a normal home birth the first time round. After a previous c-section induction isn't meant to be used IIRC?
I'm not (yet) in the same position but interested in answers. I'm 40w tomorrow with DD2 and hoping for VBAC. DD1 started labour at 38.5 weeks then had CS for breech. I've been told my hospital doesn't do repeat CS just because of previous CS, if I go overdue I will have to be induced!! Not happy at all about that, I would rather have a repeat CS than be induced. So I've been trying to think about whether I can push to give a bit more time for labour to start before agreeing to either CS or induction.
There are some increased risks with going beyond 42 weeks, but again the risks are still very small. You can ask for expectant management where you go in to the hospital every day or every other day and they monitor the baby to check all is fine. I'm considering asking for this between 42 and 43 weeks if necessary, and then having either induction or CS at 42+5 or something like that. In your case particularly as DS1 came at 42 weeks I think you'd have a good case for going a few days over 42 weeks with regular monitoring.
If you're not comfortable being induced yet then ask for expectant management - then if any issues are picked up, go for induction (I think it's a different route to the usual if you've had a previous C/S)
The 'due date' is estimated for a reason - it's not an exact science, and in France (so hardly a million miles away, and somewhere with a good health service) considers term to be 42 weeks.
Placentas fail at varying stages of pregnancy, but not everyone is induced at 38 weeks 'just in case' and the risk of stillbirth DOES double after 41/42 weeks - from 0.03% to 0.06% IIRC (looked into it some time ago now) so it's still tiny.
I was induced at 42+1 (reluctantly) with DD who was very overcooked, but I am adamant she was in an odd position (her heel was off to my right hand side, level with where my waist is now) and she was very long, so I don't think she had moved into a position where she was putting enough pressure on my cervix - much like QOFE.
Thanks for your replies. At the moment the babys head is still in front of my cervix and induction is not really on the table due to the cs last time.
Its so hard when they start the stillbirth arguement but as Flisspaps says if 42 weeks is term in France then it can't be that clear a risk or they would have revised it. I am so stressed about it and driving myself nuts knowing I'm less likely to go into labour naturally if I'm stressed.
Anyone know where you can buy castor oil?
15, 13 and 14 days over with my DC's 1,2 and 3. Was induced with DD1, I refused induction with the others as by my dates they weren't as late as it looked!
I have been 'late' with all mine (although one was 'early' at just 2days overdue). However, I was never comfortable going beyond the 42w, so was induced with the first and the last (of 9)at 41+6 and 42w respectively. Just the limit to the time I personally was willing to risk.
At my hospital they told me that they wouldn't induce because my previous c sec was only 18 months before increasing the chance of rupture of the scar. The induction drugs can put more pressure on the scar than labour that started naturally.
DS1 was born on 40 weeks plus 13 days. I really pushed for a later induction (it's a long story) and was induced at 40 weeks plus 11 days, and had him 2 days later. I was told by consultant that this is the absolute latest they like to see the induction done, and I had to go in hospital every day from 40 weeks + 10 days for baby heart monitoring. I had to have a c section in the end because DS' heart was not recovering after the contractions. The placenta had started to deteriorate so looking back maybe I should have agreed to earlier induction.
I went 18 days over with DS and 13 days over with dd. both times the placenta was in perfect condition.
However, although I felt ok doing it I never advise others to - it is entirely up to you to weigh up the risks and decide. I will warn you that it is very stressful as you have to be monitored every day and the pressure to accept induction is enormous!
good luck whatever you decide.
Lots of positive stories here, but I must say that my mu went 19 days over with my sister and she was very ill when she was born and her placenta was black and rotting. The doctors told my mum she was very lucky to be ok after a few days.
I don't say this as someone who likes to scaremonger, I advocate natural birth an a womans choice to refuse indction, but i just wanted to pint out that things aren't always 'ok'
mind you tht was 18 yars ago and i tink you can choose to be monitored daily they didn't d that with my mum i don't think.
i think, with daily monitoring, these days they could tell if a placenta was going 'down hill' so to speak.
Totoro yes that is the point of the monitoring. But that is also why I don't encourage anyone to refuse induction even though I was happy to do that myself.
I'm 41 weeks with no signs of anything happening soon. My induction will be booked for 42 weeks; my lovely community midwives not only support but advocate ignoring my hospital's 40+10 policy. I will be scanned instead at that date, so it relies on all being well then.
We discussed it all yesterday and I said I would like to try expectant management rather than induction at 42 weeks. They were supportive of that if I wanted to do it, but said in their opinion, after 42 weeks there is usually meconium in the waters, which means CFM, even if it would almost certainly be maturity rather than distress causing it. On balance, am I better off being induced at 42 weeks, well swept, and having some shot at an active birth?
My real sadness is that either seems to mean not having my HB, but obviously a healthy baby and my own health come before that.
Piglit - any news?
I'm also 41 weeks and am also meant to be trying for a VBAC. No signs at all of imminent labour, and being late runs in the family, so am expecting intervention of some kind.
The issue of induction seems to vary from hospital to hospital. Where I am, they've said they'll do a cervical examination at the end of this week, and if my cervix is 'favourable' then they'll book an induction. If it's not favourable, they've booked me in for an ELCS just prior to 42 weeks as a backup. I feel happy with this plan. My feeling is that the longer they cook for, the bigger they'll be, and thus the likelihood of a successful VBAC diminishes.
this time exactly last year i was in last stages of labour to a 16day late ds
Very happy to report that I went into labour spontaneously yesterday morning and now have a lovely baby girl. I had a natural birth in 4 hours and still can't quite believe it. The placenta was huge and the baby absolutely fine.
Hope all the other waiting ladies start of their own accord.
DD's placenta was huge as well and the MW told me that there is apparently a link between a large placenta and longevity
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.