Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

To turn down ECV and go straight for a c-section?

69 replies

Wibblypiglikesbananas · 15/10/2013 15:58

So, 2 years ago, DC1 popped out vaginally no probs. Quick labour, bad tear and stitches but all healed and no negative side effects.

Now 38 weeks with DC2 and he's breech. Options are c-section or ECV, then c-section if this fails. I'd just about decided on c-section but saw a different Dr this morning who said I'd be a good candidate for ECV and was pretty persuasive, so am now in two minds again.

Reasons for not trying ECV include the risk of placental abrubtion (small) but also an element of control in my own head. I'd rather know what I was letting myself in for than try ECV, it fail and end up in theatre anyway. Or try ECV, be induced and then end up with a c-section anyway, if that makes sense.

I'm in the US, not the UK, so pls don't comment on costs to the NHS etc as it's not relevant in this case. Everything is covered by health insurance so it's basically my call.

An extra consideration is that being overseas, we don't have family on hand (though my mum is coming over in a few days) so c-section recovery could be tricky with a toddler. However, I don't want to base my decision on that - if it comes to it, we'd have to get a nanny temporarily.

DH is trying to be supportive but to be honest, I don't think he could ever really understand somehow. So - wise Mumsnetters, would you go straight for the c-section?

TIA

OP posts:

fryingpantoface · 15/10/2013 16:06

I've always said that if it came to it, i would go for the c section. I read into it a lot when i was pregnant with ds, i decided i wouldn't want want the ecv

TigOldBitties · 15/10/2013 16:08

Personally I wouldn't, I have been in a similar position as yourself but with DC4 and I did everything I could to avoid a c-section.

Recovery times, risk of complications, the fact that its surgery, and again the issue of needing to recover in a way that I never did when I had vaginal birth. It just seemed too much to put my body through unless it was absolutely necessary.

TheBreastmilksOnMe · 15/10/2013 16:10

Have you tried the spinning babies website here ?

Seeline · 15/10/2013 16:11

I had ecv with DD - it worked fine, although she was transverse, not full breach. I had DS, 2.8 at the time and the thought of having a CS and having to deal with him and a new baby made it worth the try for me.

UsedToBeNDP · 15/10/2013 16:15

Both procedures carry risk, but you sound like you've got your head screwed on and you probably have a decent medical team behind you. Neither is the 'wrong' answer, you just have to choose the best option for you and yours. No one can tell you which way to go. Best of luck, whichever you choose

Booboostoo · 15/10/2013 16:16

I had already chosen ELCS so it was irrelevant but DD was transverse and had I not chosen ELCS in advance I would have gone for CS because of the position. Inform yourself of the risks of ECV, personally I was not willing to take them. For me the risks of CS were more acceptable, but it is a personal decision.

Original poster

Wibblypiglikesbananas · 15/10/2013 16:17

Thanks for all the replies so far. I've tried spinning babies and had acupuncture/moxibustion but nothing's shifted him. He's been head up since 28 weeks so I don't think he's moving!

OP posts:

peanutMD · 15/10/2013 16:18

Nope i did this in March.

My Aunt lost her baby at 39 weeks 2 days after an ECV that ruptured the placenta and want picked up.

Original poster

Wibblypiglikesbananas · 15/10/2013 16:19

Exactly Booboo - I thought I was fully decided but the Dr this morning seemed to lean towards ECV first. The Dr I saw last week said most women shed treated went straight for the c-section due to wanting to be in control, the risks of ECV and the fact that it's only got a 50% success rate.

OP posts:

PostmanPatAlwaysRingsTwice · 15/10/2013 16:19

Everything I've read about ECV on here makes me think I would always refuse to have one. I'd do what I could to get the baby into the right position myself and if that failed, have the section.

minibmw2010 · 15/10/2013 16:22

Have had an ECV for DS who was breech (he had his legs straight). It was desperately painful and I had to spend the next day hooked up to a monitor in case I went into labour. As it is I did the next day so we had the CS which was fine.

minibmw2010 · 15/10/2013 16:23

Personally I'd always recommend against ..

rosyryan · 15/10/2013 16:26

I would go for the section personally. Good luck with whatever you choose.

Original poster

Wibblypiglikesbananas · 15/10/2013 16:27

See, this is good as most people seem to be against ECV, which is what I'd decided originally. It's just this Dr - he was so adamant that he'd be able to turn him no problem, and there's a tiny part of me that's thinking, imagine if he did turn him in 5 mins flat, there were no complications and I was able to avoid the surgery. Dilemma!

OP posts:

urtwistingmymelonman · 15/10/2013 16:30

im in a similar position except baby is transverse and ive got a bit longer to go than you.
turning may not be an option for me as I have a clotting disorder which may have passed to baby so could be too risky so I may have no choice but to have a section.
I think though if I had the choice I would go straight for the section.

CrohnicallyLurking · 15/10/2013 16:33

I had an ECV which failed. It was painful, but actually I remember the pain even less than I remember the pain from childbirth. I only had to be monitored for an hour or so afterwards, as any adverse effects like placental abrupt ion happen immediately if they're going to happen at all.

A few things I found out when deciding, one was different doctors have different success rates due to technique and to a certain extent, hand size etc. So it's worth finding out about your chosen doctor. Secondly, the chances of an ECV working are very small if baby is already engaged, or if baby has been breech for a long time as opposed to changing positions- these are probably the main reasons mine failed.

There is another option, I don't know if you've considered it. But it is possible to have a breech baby vaginally, especially if you've already given birth vaginally before and have a doctor experienced in breech births. However, it's recommended that you have no interventions other than gas and air, as any intervention dramatically increases the risk of problems. You can ask for a 'breech trial', you attempt to give birth vaginally but rather than intervening, you move straight to c section.

Original poster

Wibblypiglikesbananas · 15/10/2013 16:36

Giving birth to a breech baby vaginally doesn't seem to happen here - unless they come out at speed. I think it might be an option at certain UK hospitals though. It's a good question to ask though. I'll check at my next appointment.

OP posts:

minibmw2010 · 15/10/2013 16:37

Having a breech baby vaginally is very risky and only a good idea if the medical personnel looking after you are experienced in it. To be honest i'd be very surprised if they'd do that in the US, as they're generally so risk adverse. I'm sure the Dr is confident, after all if he manages it then he's saved the cost of a c-section! Good luck with whatever you decide.

Scrounger · 15/10/2013 16:43

I had an ECV, it didn't work and it feels as though it is medicine from the middle ages. I told I could ask for it to stop at any time but it took the nurse seeing me in tears to ask me if I was OK, I found it difficult to stop it once it had started - should have spoken up earlier but felt that I had to give it a good try. He put his hands around my bump and physically squeezed them closer and then tried to twist the bump. I found it really primitive.

I had an ES a couple of days later, I found the recovery OK, some do and some don't. I had a second ES for my second pregnancy and just explained to DS (3 1/2 yo at the time) that he couldn't stand on me, I couldn't lift him etc. He was OK with that. Getting in additional help with the lifting etc is a good idea.

It is your choice, that is just my experience, good luck with whatever you decide.

Scrounger · 15/10/2013 16:46

Oh, following Crohnically's post my DC had been breech from really early on the Dr had massive hands. (Feels wrong typing that).

Does whether it is your first pregnancy have any bearing on it, more 'elastic' with later ones? Dim memory of this but I may be wrong.

WaitMonkey · 15/10/2013 16:48

I've had ECV, it worked and wasn't painful at all. It also ment I avoided having major surgery (CS), something I really wanted to avoid as I also had a one year old, and didn't fancy the recovery needed from a CS. I would try the ECV in order to avoid a CS.

FortyDoorsToNowhere · 15/10/2013 16:59

you have instincts for a reason, I would follow your 1st thought and go straight for a c-section.

ImAFrequentNameChanger · 15/10/2013 17:06

I would go for the c-section. Best decision I ever made and I recovered far more quickly than friends who had vaginal births. Follow your instincts.

thing1andthing2 · 15/10/2013 17:07

What are your chances of a successful vaginal delivery if this doctor does manage to turn the baby? As I understood it, vag deliveries after ECV were higher risk than if the baby had never been breech. Will attempt to find some research and post again.

enjolraslove · 15/10/2013 17:32

I had an ecv at 38 weeks- totally fine, really honestly no pain at all and it worked. Ds was born vaginally 4 weeks later a d had obviously stayed head down etc. he was also large (9lb12) but the ecv was still fine. I would give it a go as obviously it worked well for me but the stuff I read also said that if it was painful (the ecv) then that meant it wasn't going to work so be clear that if it hurts you will tell them to stop (don't be brave!)

For me the recovering from a section with one child already was something I really wanted to avoid

Flip

1 2 3

Swipe left for the next trending thread