Talk

Advanced search

Would you like to be a member of our research panel? Join here - there's (nearly) always a great incentive offered for your views.

breech baby not engaged

(3 Posts)
eggcup Wed 19-Oct-11 18:14:49

Hello
I'm 36 weeks, just been for a consultation and was told that as baby is not engaged, there is a risk of the cord prolapsing and that at my next consultation (at 37 weeks) I should bring my bag as they will want to admit me until c-section at 38 weeks.
DD1 was transverse which wasn't picked up until 41 weeks, so I had ELCS at 42 weeks, no signs of labour even starting.
Anyone got any experience of this? Do I really have to go into hospital next week?!!

londontj Wed 19-Oct-11 20:52:13

Same thing happened to me. Dd was transverse breech and I was admitted at 37+1 until an elective C section at 39 +1. They brooked no argument as to whether it was necessary and I could see cord prolapse wasn't worth risking. In the end there was no sign of labour before my c section so it all felt like an overreaction But then another girl on the ward in the same situation went into labour and had to be rushed off for an emergency Cs which gave me pause for thought.
On the flip side I'm now Pg with DC2 and at a different hospital who say their policy is different and I wouldn't be admitted which, having been told how vital it was last time, I'm a little worried about.
Think you probably have to go with the medical advice as the risk just isn't worth taking. I found it weirdly relaxing in the antenatal ward once i'd got over the initial shock of having to be there - much calmer than postnatal wards!
Good luck

eggcup Thu 20-Oct-11 10:20:59

thanks londontj, good to hear your story it has helped me calm down a bit!

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now