to get annoyed when people tell me I'm lucky to have had such a quick labourr?

[MrsHelsBels74]

I was severely traumatised by the birth of my son. It was very quick & there was no time for any pain relief. Yet people tell me I'm lucky I wasn't in labour for 30+ hours etc.

AIBU to want to tell these people to fuck off as they weren't there & have no idea what it was like? I don't think there is such a thing as an easy birth, however you do it it's hard work & very few people get the birth they actually envisaged?

"AIBU to want to tell these people to fuck off as they weren't there & have no idea what it was like?"

Yes YABU because you don't know what their birth was like either! And why cannot you not just explain "actually it wasnt as great as it sounds...", because to someone like me a short labour was all I wished for.

Both my babies ended up as emergencies as they both got stuck after 17 hour long labours of agony. On paper, yes I might want to swap births with you to avoid that. In reality I do not know as I wasnt there at your briths of course.

My body was in shock, I was shivering and puking
I felt out of control.
Very painful
DD was born superman style which is more common in fast birth and I tore forwards not backwards

I think that points one to three are normal for all deliveries, not some special feature of quick births.

ohdearNigel your previous post is exactly the point I'm trying to make, you say you don't think my labour was traumatic, as people have said its not about the labour as much as the effect it had on me. My son was born with a black eye as he banged his head on my pelvis on the way down, I had a 2nd degree tear (not horrendous I know but bad enough) & was totally unprepared for the amount of blood coming from me afterwards.

I ended up with severe PND caused partly by how traumatised I felt by the labour.

I'm not, nor have I ever tried to say mine was worse than anyone else's, just that it annoys me when people say I'm lucky as I don't feel lucky. Obviously I appreciate it was good that no intervention was needed but it was still, for me, a deeply unpleasant experience & I'm dreading it again if I'm honest.

I've only been through it once and it was pretty quick. I was induced and it was about 5 hours from first contraction to delivery. The contractions were like turning on a switch (went from nothing at all to them being insanely intense and I couldn't even tell when one started and one finished) and it scared the shit out of me as they'd just sent my DH home (because inductions take AGES don't they?). I progressed really quickly but was pushing for around half the labour (so two and a half hours). I had an episiotomy (two cuts) and was 5 minutes away from a ventouse delivery. Luckily, I didn't find it traumatic, so I do feel lucky it was a fast labour. The only scary thing was how quickly the contractions came on me when I'd never had one before. I completely panicked which obviously just makes things worse. By the time my DH got back to the hospital and I'd had some gas and air and pethidine, I got it under control and although it was bloody hard work I just got on with it. It's different for everyone at the end of the day...anyone who's had a terrible long labour would look at someone with a short one and think "how lucky..."

OP, I understand where you are coming from. I am 26 weeks pg with my second and had an awful birth.
Mine was 58 hours with all the pain relief but in the end went from 0-10cm in 40 minutes with nothing as I had had everything possible already. DD1 was premature at 32 weeks as well, ended in theatre with a spinal block and an emergency forceps delivery to save her life. 2nd degree tear.

It doesn't matter whether your birth is quick or long, if it's traumatic for you, it is. Simple as that.

Absolutely shitting myself this time, thought I could manage ok but freaking out already. Scared of another early arrival as well as the actual labour, and this is after councelling.

So yes, tell them to F off if you want to. Good luck.

Anyone who has a livebirth is lucky.

Most births are traumatic, they are just traumatic in different ways. Labour/delivery is hard work, painful, exhausting, stressful and worrying. At least with a quick labour you only have this for a short time.

There are pros and cons to all types of delivery and birth.

I absolutely loved both of my labours and would happily do them again anyday (but dont want anymore kids !!!)
1st was 3hrs 15 mins and resulted in 9lb 13oz ds1 and a few stitches
2nd was 47 minutes and resulted in 6lb 1/2oz dd and 7lb 2oz ds2 and a few stitches
Both times the worst part was having to stay in hospital overnight (both night Births)

But if you feel that you're fast labour was traumatic then thats what it was and you are totally justified in telling people that you dont feel lucky.
Hope this time round is alot bettr for you and that you feel more in control

Well my first labour was 52 hours of pain and trauma! Second labour was 1 hour 54 minutes of pain, the quick one was by far the better one.

Op I see from your profile you live near me, I can recommend a fantastic doula if you're interested? She was at dc2's birth and was great at keeping everything calm.

I hear you! all of my births were quick; but my second was particularly traumatic to the point it was what feels like a violent birth to my body. I had a nearly 9lb baby in 2 1/2 hours, and I'm not a big person. I don't like to play the "mine was worse than yours game" but I will say 4 years on it still is a hard memory. However my next birth was a very gentle healing birth (still quick though), which has eased a lot of it for me. I think you just want what you went through to be acknowledged and respected too. People really have no clue sometimes.

Imagine the pain you had go on for 12hours or more, then you will understand why they think you're lucky, not everyone opts for/is offered pain relief either and gas&air is shite!

I can see where you're coming from OP, my third was born after a 5 hour labour and that was my longest labour! I went into shock all 3 times, as did the DC's and me and the baby ended up on oxygen. I was shaking so much they couldn't deliver the placenta as I couldn't actually open my legs..
Having said that, I didn't need intervention and have never torn so I do consider myself lucky.
If someone asks you, just laugh and say something like "long enough thanks!"
On balance YANBU.

tangointhenight g&a is definitly a waste of time, with DD2 someone took the breathing tube off me as I couldn't hold it in my mouth and ended up smacking DH in the face with it. Twice.

I don't think YABU by the way, all births are different and you only know what its like to have it be quick, and those calling you lucky only know what its like for it to be long. Mine was in between, was given pessary at 10pm, 5 cms by 5am and delivered DD at 11am.

Well I did prefer my second labour as there was less pain! He came in 2.5 hours from first pain but it was all a bit scary as we were at home and DH had to deliver him and I knew the cord was coming out first which can be dangerous.

The speed meant I went into shock though and my teeth were chattering for about an hour and I was shaking.

flobba it made me violently sick and feel completely out if control. Never again!

I had a quick labour with ds3, first twinge at Midday then he emerged at 3.55 pm on the dot and I had no tear so do consider myself lucky but by christ it was painful and he was a 9lb bundle! Ds 1 was the longest at 17 hours and I was knocked out by the pethidine for half of that. I can't begin to imagine being in labour for days. People don't know the ins and outs of your birth so correct them as you feel. YANBU!

OP, I think it would be rude to tell people to fuck off, but I understand why you feel the way you do.

My first labour was 8 hours and I had very little pain, an epidural, it was a breeze compared to some of my friends' labours (30 hours, caesarean etc).

My second was 3 and a half hours, with contractions around 3 minutes apart from about 20 minutes in. It was brutal, and I think sort of compressed if that's a suitable word - everything happened so fast.

I was at home and had no time to transfer. The contractions were very close and very intense. I was in physical shock afterwards, lost a fair bit of blood (not a massive PPH but around half a litre) and nearly had to be blue lighted to hospital and might not have made it as it's nearly an hour away...luckily I was Ok in the end.

I remember lying on the bed being stitched and feeling like I had been run over and then reversed over again by a large articulated lorry.

I am sure that many births feel like this but the fact it was so fast, I think made it more intense as the same amount of work was being done, but within a far shorter time frame. So my body was genuinely shocked.

I am always, always grateful though that it did not go on for any longer. I think the stamina required for a 30 hour labour, or even one lasting 15 hours would be harder for me.

So I think all in all it's swings and roundabouts. I envy only the people who experience no pain and are able to be up and about within hours...I could never manage either of those things! (not without copious drugs)

YABU. Agree with what other posters said:

"if you don't want their comments then don't tell them you had a quick labour."

"Obviously having pain for a short period of time is better than hsving pain for a long period."

VolauVent, have you ever had a very fast labour?

The thing about having pain for a short time being better than for a long time isn't very accurate.

Your body still has to have the same number of contractions (within a rough average) to get a baby out.

Because it is quicker, it just means it is more full-on and more intense and there is the possibility of shock. It doesn't mean you get less pain overall, just that it all happens in a shorter space of time.

I personally prefer it to the drawn out test of stamina, and of course some unlucky folk get a really bad long labour as well, with all sorts of painful complications and interventions. But it's the same amount of work, generally, whether it happens over 30 or 3 hours.

I wouldn't worry about what people say. I am sure they are not meaning to upset you rather just trying to put a positive slant on it.

I had one really really long labour, a medium length labour and a lightening fast one which lasted 50 mins from first twinge to birth of 9 lb baby eyes watering just thinking about it the fast birth was really painful especially as I tore, a lot. It was still my easiest birth simply because it was so fast. I didn't feel tired in the same way as the other two births. I do think I , sort of, went into shock afterwards, which is not suprising really.
I think it is insensitive of anyone to volunteer anyone else's birth as easy though!
So YANBU. But I still wouldn't worry about it myself.

Just remembered that after my fast labour my DH commented that I had 'lost it' a bit during the birth. He was bloody lucky he did not loose anything after that comment.

I did scream a lot and loudly

Having no pain is not all it's cracked up to be.

I only had a few period type pains with ds3, I was due an elcs because he was transverse. By the time we realised how far along I was I was nearly 6 cm and the cord had prolapsed. We were very lucky that he suffered no long term effects.

Ds4 was born with no pain or contractions at all, He was also 20 weeks early because I have incompetant cervix

Emilie there isn't a set amount of pain or contractions that you have regardless of length of labour. My cousin had 4 contractions in total and gave birth on her kitchen floor. I have had labours ranging from a 28 hour hideously awful, painful nightmare where I was contracting every 3 minutes virtually from onset, to an hour and a half easy one which wasn't really intense or overly painful. Each woman and each labour are different.

Missy, yes, you're right of course. I think I should have been clearer about it being an average.

I was reading a table of the average number of contractions for first, second andthird labours and it gave the impression that most labours fell into a rough average - but I could be wrong about that.

I know a lot of people who seem to have had very spaced apart ctx during a prolonged labour, say starting off at 20 minutes apart, for a few hours, then ten, etc etc. while in mine, it was one at 7 minutes apart, the next at 5 minutes, then another 5 minuter then three minutes and two minutes and eventually one minute all the way.

I would imagine I had as many contractions during that 3 hour period as a lot of other people would have had in say, ten hours. iyswim.

But yes it is different for everyone and every labour.