So this little angel bugger has gone from transverse, loa -roa (and back again about 50 times), to ROT Right Occiput Transverse or Right Occiput Lateral I think it's called in the UK in the last week.
Has anyone had experience with this position? I'm seeing that's its a posterior position that midwives don't like. Apparently it can cause a longer, more painful labour if you can deliver that way at all. Being a homebirth this is obviously worrying me quite a bit.
Or had anyone had babies move at the 37 week mark still?
My baby moved between 36-37 week's from oblique to Head down so it's still possible have a look at spinning babies website they will give you hints and tips. I doubt you could have anything other than c section if baby didn't move..
An OP baby doesn't mean a section. DS (my first) was OP, stayed OP, and was OP right through my labour. I delivered him vaginally with no episiotomy or instruments. Yes, I was pushing for ages (three and a half hours) but as well as being OP he was coming forehead first which probably contributed to that (he tucked his head last minute and then shot out in two pushes once he did).
It seems in the US they are very quick to drug you up or give you a CS, especially if baby is in a less than prime position. But you don't have to agree to it, if you'd like a home birth with minimal intervention and there is no obvious reason to suspect anything will go wrong then stick to your guns. And good luck!
OP babies are more likely than oa babies to need intervention and/or result in longer labours. BUT the majority of op babies are still born vaginally and there are no foregone conclusions. Some women have op babies and find them them easiest to give birth to. Some start op and turn during labour. A lot of women don't even know they have a posterior baby.
I had two babies who were persistently ot, turning op occasionally. I couldn't shift them. Medical staff couldn't shift them. I had no control over it annoyingly. Second time round I refused to waste energy worrying about it.