Would you like to be a member of our research panel? Join here - there's (nearly) always a great incentive offered for your views.
turning a breech baby(120 Posts)
IM currently 33 weeks and my baby is still head up. I know I still have time for baby to turn but i don't think it will as has been in this position all along. At midwife appt this morning she was talking about what would happen if baby doesn't turn by 37 weeks and the turning the baby by hand procedure sounds horific. Grateful for any sharing of experiences of this.
Don't want to hijack, but I've just been diagnosed with a breech baby at 36 weeks. Is DC3, so there may be room for it turning by itself yet. However I've had CS and VBAC already, anyone know if they'll even consider ECV (which I'm not really keen on) or natural breech birth after having had a section, or will they just recommend CS? Really wanted to avoid CS, but not to the point of putting baby or me at increased risk.
If you look at the guidelines libertychick has linked to above a scared uterus is one factor they would take into consideration when deciding if an ECV was appropriate.
Yea, wasn't sure how quickly it rules ECV out or whether it's just one factor they consider amongst others. Does anyone have experience of a vaginal breech delivery after CS? I suspect it's probably not recommended...
StayingZen- my DD had clicky hips (but not properly dislocated) due to being a frank breech. 6 weeks in washable nappies sorted her out though. I know hip problems are common for breech babies, but I just wanted to mention it to show that (like all problems) there's a range of how it can manifest.
Good luck OP!
No - DS2 was head down so I was lucky.
My baby was transverse - I bought a pregnancy ball and have been careful not to slouch for the past couple of weeks. My midwife told me today that baby's moved...he's now breech!!! One step closer to (potential) natural birth but not there yet xx
I've not any personal experience but my acupuncturist reckoned she had a 100% success rate in turning breech babies, so could be worth a try.
I had breech twins!
Born vaginally with the help of an epidural it was a relatively easy birthing process .The second baby was ,I think, just pulled by his ankles as that birth was particularly rapid.Both babies weighed over 7lbs and were overdue by 1 week.I was only 5 foot tall and I put on less weight with that pregnancy than I had done with the previous one .
But that was in the olden days when breech births were not so managed as they seem to be now.I have never heard of some of the procedures mentioned on this thread.
Both my babies were transverse until 39 weeks. They both turned of their own accord, BUT my consultant told me he wouldn't put his wife through an EVC and therefore would not put a patient through it...he would perform a C-section instead. My second waited until the day before the scheduled section to turn, then settled in a head down position for 2 more weeks until he was delivered vaginally and weighed 9lb 10. Consultant was bemused and said he had no idea how he found room to turn in there at that size.
Oh, and I didn't do anything special to encourage him to turn
rufus- I don't know the answer to your question, but I would be surprised if they considered ECV.
and I would personally go for an ELSC - despite being a big fan of VBACs.
My GP was doing my 38-week check on the Wednesday when she found the heartbeat was a few cm in the wrong direction from expected. Off to hospital the following morning for a scan, yes breech, and extended breech too (legs straight out). I was told by the reg. that this type of breech was unlikely to turn with ECV and could damage his hips if they tried. So I would advise knowing what kind of breech you have. In normal breeches the legs are curled up at the bum end. Footling has one leg pointing more down and one not.
Did I want an ELCS? Heck yes! Day after that (Friday) I was in for pre-op meeting with anaesthetist and Monday DS arrived in a very pleasant way. He had frogfeet for a few weeks though! ie his legs were always curled up over his body rather than lying down as normal. My decision was easy - the ELCS was best for baby, even if riskier for me.
I'm breech & 38+4-booked in for elcs on Monday. Can't wait to get pg over with, ESP in this heat. A happy vaginal delivery would be good but the thought of possibly staying pregnant for another 3 weeks (and then ending in an emergency cs) is horrific!
I had elcs 3 yrs ago with DS & was a good experience, although I don't think there's any really easy way to get a baby out!
OP breech is far more fun and comfy than head down (for baby that is ) but when you start getting bh baby will quickly get down as that's more comfortable. Keep positive, tell your mw baby will turn when ready and doesn't need hurrying. A facebook friend was posting all the things she'd tried and is writing me an article for many magazine about her trials. in the end baby turned ready for birth.
btw I had a crash section for breech labour and I told them after it's the only way they'd get me again.
firstly baby gets ad much possible time inside to turn.
secondly they get as much possible growth time as possible
thirdly there's a hormonal link between baby's development and labour so whether preterm or postmature baby will do better I'd labour is triggered naturally.
Courgette thirdly there's a hormonal link between baby's development and labour so whether preterm or postmature baby will do better I'd labour is triggered naturally
There is not a single study of quality (as opposed to low quality studies undertaken by those with 'agendas') that shows any difference between the long term outcomes of babies born by caesarean and those born naturally. It is part of the natural birth lobby's sinister misinformation machine (I think Kirsty Allsopp's term was a good one ). It plays on women's feelings of guilt and insecurity by making them feel that choosing a caesarean would harm their baby and imply that they are therefore a bad mother.
For instance, all the studies that 'prove' asthma is linked to caesarean are right BUT it is not to do with the caesarean causing asthma. They ignore the obvious reason; caesarean sections are generally done because of complications and some are done earlier than 39 weeks because the complication is serious. Early delivery IS linked to respiratory conditions but if the baby were not delivered, some would die.
I am not accusing you of trying to mislead Courgette - I am sure you meant it genuinely. All I am saying is that the there is a lot of highly misleading, selective information being peddled by the very clever 'natural' lobby and I would be deeply suspicious.
NHS Choices and NICE offer reasonably balanced information and if they aren't highlighting a risk (which in this case they aren't) - then I certainly wouldn't worry about it.
Well excuse me for believing my doctors when they said it's why my 20 weeker survived at my 29 weeker has done so well and why they waited for labour for my planned crash.
courgette breech being more fun you say?
erm, not for me.
DS4 was a footling breech, right foot stuck just above cervical "plug" and everytime he kicked in the last 6 weeks I thought his foot would come through!
it was horrible, incredibly painful and scary!
no thanks, I much preferred the gentle pressure of a snuggly head down there with the other 5 kids!
Yeah, not for mums, I'm sure I said that! I've had two footling, one vb and the other my crash. The one I had crashed used to do laps of my pelvis and swing her legs about. Of course that meant uncontrolled weeing on my part!
Courgette I think they meant they waited as long as possible which would have made your babies healthier but that is different to saying that all babies do better if labour is triggered naturally.
A huge number of women need c/s reasons for both physical and psychological reasons. There really is no reason at all for anyone to worry that their baby may be 'harmed' by the section.
There's no evidence for it at all - none, absolutely none - which is very good news for the 200,000 or so women who need c/s in uk every year.
Ushy, I went into labour at 24 weeks, I think they meant that I triggered labour!
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.