Advanced search

56 hour labour for second always quicker?!

(12 Posts)
Anna2006 Sun 11-Mar-18 21:14:28

56 hour labour for my DD. This is from first twinge. She was back to back tho and so contractions were pretty intense and close together from offset. Was 16 hours of official active labour. Overall it was pretty hell and ended in forceps, episiotomy and 3rd degree tear after water broken manually and syntocin drip due to slow progress.

I have always wanted more than one child. But thought of childbirth and another long labour terrifies me.

Has anyone had very long latent phase for first and second been a lot speedier?

OP’s posts: |
Newmrs22 Sun 11-Mar-18 21:27:25

Sorry I can't help OP but watching with interest. I'm 7 weeks pregnant with baby number 2 and wondering the same thing! I had 18 hours of active labour but lots more before that.

RandomMess Sun 11-Mar-18 21:27:50

It's unusual for the 2nd to be worse, I should think especially after such a long and arduous first one.

Certainly the 2nd stage was much faster!!! I was induced will all 4 of mine, the first was the longest and most hard work.

tootsieglitterballs Sun 11-Mar-18 21:30:03

First; started induction with very slow start to labour on Saturday AM, full blown labour Monday evening, not born until Tuesday night by EMCS

Second: started with irregular contractions Wednesday evening, continued to be irregular all day Thursday, kicked off properly at 9.30pm Thursday night, born 6 hours later by VBAC. Amazing experience!

Peachy27 Sun 11-Mar-18 21:50:34

My first labour sounds pretty identical to yours. Second was 12 hours from first twinge to delivery, it was totally manageable for about 9 hours then the final three I was in the pool with gas and air. Much bigger baby than the first and no tearing at all.

Anna2006 Mon 12-Mar-18 09:30:17

Oh I’m glad there is light at the end of the tunnel. Having a lengthy first labour does put you off doesn’t it.

@Peachy27 how long did you leave between your dcs?

OP’s posts: |
Peachy27 Mon 12-Mar-18 15:38:42

Just over two years

blinkineckmum Tue 13-Mar-18 20:54:23

Very similar 1st birth to yours. 2nd one was very straightforward. 4.5 hours. Did 3.5 of them at home, got to hospital 10cm dilated and ready to push.

mogulfield Wed 14-Mar-18 11:58:45

My 1st was like yours... 44 hours and back to back.
My 2nd was much quicker... contractions started at midnight.. stayed home until 3am, was 3cm when I arrived at hospital and DS was born at 7:36am! Went from 4-10cm in about 40 minutes.
In my first labour I was contracting regularly for 44 hours, so I figure my cervix had more contraction practice than most... which made for a super quick second labour! Not sure how scientific that theory is. You’ll be fine, the odds are stacked on your favour that it will be much quicker.

Anna2006 Wed 14-Mar-18 16:07:25

This definitely gives me hope! Makes sense doesn’t it.

Very happy with my DD for now but nice to know for a future pregnancy that I don’t necessarily need to dread the labour 🙈

OP’s posts: |
rufieroo Wed 14-Mar-18 16:16:12

My first was also back to back and Labour was about 27 hours and quite frankly awful, second was all in about 3 hours, with only about one hour of the v painful contractions and he was born within about 5 minutes of being at the hospital, I'd do it again in a heartbeat!!!

llangennith Wed 14-Mar-18 16:31:20

36 hours with first, 3 hours with second. Induced with third.

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in