Cox the only issue for me was wanting a home birth, they agreed my dates were ok for that until i was over 42 by their dates, then it all went a bit off piste and they eventually refused to attend while i was in labour, which in hindsight is illegal, although i let it slide at the time (i had two midwives out, one who confirmed waters had gone, then one who examined me and decided i wasn't in established labour yet as cervix wasn't 4cm or whatever yet, then the third refused to examine or attend and told me she was only there to persuade me to go in!!). We compromised on mlu instead of labour ward in the end. If that sort of "following procedure" with no medical indications happens again husband and doula are both briefed to intervene on my behalf as i didn't want to engage with the midwives to fight my corner, i wanted to be left in my zone.
I have advance sign off this time for home birth even if over 42w and if my waters go first (both of which had them flapping last time even though contractions started immediately).
The "you're late" appointment (timing varies by trust, mine was 40+10)) should include offering sweep or induction as well as expectant management (ie monitoring baby's heartbeat every day or two, plus placenta scan to check bloodflow ok) but my experience of how things can be phrased suggests often things are only presented as a done deal or only one"option" is really presented, where everything should remain the labouring woman's choice. I've heard of people being refused mlu over 42w but can't see why either especially if mlu and main labour ward are in same building, i think the "default" is continual monitoring if post dates (not shown to improve outcomes) and the machines are on mlu anyway (or they found one in my case - perhaps pinched from labour ward ? - for a short monitoring session on arrival).
Midwife who saw me last this time was really supportive of hb, and even said "they've not mentioned induction yet, have they?!" which i was glad about 