Your childbirth experience the same as your mothers?? how likely?

[Dozeyland]

a friend just said this, is it nonsense?

I've never talked in detail to my mum about my birth, but I know we both had forceps. For different reasons, though.

Total nonsense I think. My mother had pethidine with both me (week early) and sister (day late) and long labours both time. I was induced with DS1 (after 2 days of early labour resulting in 2cm dilation - the induction was really quite fast when it started up) but DS2 was waterbirth, from waters breaking to being in my arms within 5 hours.

I have 2 sisters. We have, between us, 8 children. We have had very different childbirth experiences.

Oldest sister drops babies in her lunchbreak, then gets back to working in the field after a quick shower (metaphorically speaking )

Second sister had premature labour both times and spent months lying on her back trying to keep her babies in.

Mine never wanted to come out, and usually required some encouragement.

Mum was crap at giving birth and, TBH, if we'd thought our experiences would be like hers, she'd have no grandchildren

I am hoping and thinking it is nonsense, the Midwife seems to think so too.

If i was like my mum then i should be expecting to be in labour for like 3 days, baby start to come out but then shoulders dont fit, then forceps . then oh no wait. have to be rushed for emergency C-section then no een know that i'd had my baby until the next day. EEK

Then two planned c-sections to prevent this again.........

I HOPE NOT!!!!!!!!!!

then again that was 24 yrs ago, she was only 18/9 a tiny in frame, if this has anything to do with it i dont know. but i just hope i dont take after her!

I would say nonsense, but FWIW my mum had one stillbirth, and one long labour of 36 hours.

I had first labour of 25 hours
2nd labour of 6 hours
and 3rd labour of 12 hours followed by EMCS

All pretty random really

Mine weren't particularly like my Mum's. She developed pre-eclampsia with her first (my sister) and was induced 1 week early. Subsequent labour longish but normal. She had a normal, shortish labour and birth with me, and I arrived 2 days before due date.

I had 2 very long ones, both started naturally a few days after due date, no hint of pre-eclampsia. Ventouse with first but second no intervention.

How about the saying "if you've had a good pregnancy you'll have a good labour" or vice versa?

I think every labour is different.

My mum had to be induced with me (and I was properly overdue, all shrunken and wrinkly and blue-grey), but the labour itself was very quick despite that. She was also induced with my sister and had an even quicker labour (although she wasn't actually post-mature as it turns out).

I went into labour spontaneously both times, but the labours progressed slowly (and extremely painfully, not helped by my babies lying awkwardly). With DS1 it was an 18 hour labour with 3+ hours of pushing (I was quite young and didn't know enough to query why the midwives hadn't called the doctor to help me out after an hour of this). I tore very badly.

My labour with DS2 was very different (much better, actually, although on paper it sounds worse). My waters broke spontaneously but my contractions didn't start properly for about 24 hours. It was still another 18 hours before DS2 arrived with the help of a ventouse (after over an hour of pushing that was never going to go anywhere). The wee bugger had an absolutely enormous head (98th percentile) and was lying very awkwardly so the suction mark was on the back rather than the top of his head, down near his neck.

Mine was very very different. Thank God

Mum had 3 - one a week late, normal delivery about 14 hours; one 2 wks early, normal but bad delivery, mega blood transfusion; me 2 wks late, vaginal breech birth, NO PAIN RELIEF (anaethetist had been up all night, was a bit tired so decided was not returning to hosp!!!).

Me - 1st, 40+7, 15hrs, normal delivery, PPH; 2nd, 39+4, 22hrs, normal delivery; 3rd, 38 (induced), normal delivery.

DSis - 36hrs, forceps, lots of damage (to her, not baby - he was 9lb something bruiser - literally)

I think it's a myth. Unless your mum has a particularly small pelvis and you inherit that from her.

My two births weren't like my mum's but both daughters' required episiotomies as they came out with round (as opposed to bullet-shaped) heads & got a bit stuck. On checking with my mum after DD1's birth, she told me that this was the same for both me & my sister so perhaps the birth may be different but perhaps genetic traits are something to look out for!

Bloody hell, I am hoping it is nonsense too. I am currently 40+5 with my first and have just had my induction booked for Saturday. Asked my Mum if I was late and she delighted in telling me that she got to 43 weeks (last week in hospital being monitored, they let her go so far because they were worried that I was small - this was 1979), induced her, the induction failed, she had an EMCS in which I nearly died. I wish I had never asked her . Am quite cross that she felt the need to go into such horrible detail about the whole thing too .

Spent the weekend crapping myself and cursing my genetic inheritance but the midwife told me this morning that there is little truth in it and I need let it go . . . Which is what I'm working on today!

Strangely my mum, her sister and I all had similar first pregnancys and labours. We all had a great pregnancy, slighty low blood pressure but felt very healthy throughout then we all got to 42 weeks without as much as a twinge never mind a contraction. We each had an induction which failed and ended up with an emergency c-section to get our lazy little baby girls out. Luckily, like my mum and aunt, I recovered very quickly and I don't feel that the whole experience was particularly bad - maybe because I half expected things to end up that way.

Interesting both mum and my aunt then had a fairly fast second labour (less than 4 hours from first twinge to birth), both a week early and both had a boy. It's wierd and probably a conincidence but it'll be interesting to see what happens if we decide to have DD2 in a couple of years.

Nope both untrue. The mother thing and the good pregnancy = good labour thing.

My mother sneezed her babies out, said she couldn't understand the fuss other women made.

I had a brilliant, easy pregnancy and then a marathon 2 day traumatic labour with every intervention going and an emergency caesarean.

You get what you're given. You can hope, plan and try and tweak things to get the optimum, but you get the hand fate deals you.

Well, I hope I will be like my mama!

First labour 6.5 hours
Second labour 3.5-4 hours
Third (myself) 1.5 hours after being induced

My eldest sister's was 4 hours from induction at 41 weeks for a 4.5kg, 60cm long niece
Second sister has a planned c-section

Consultant says he wouldn't put any store by it if it's a positive tale but if there is the same complication with all then it may be genetic. He is a veritable cheer-upper

Interesting! Talked to my mum following the birth of my first, things in common with her first born:

1. contractions started suddenly and were numbing from the off (no gradual build up);
2. labour was fairly long (21 hrs for hers, 19 hrs for mine);
3. both a week late;
4. had no urge to push;
5. had forceps and episiotomies;
6. had fairly large babies (mums - 9lb 1, mine 9lb 3oz).

My mum went on to have 3 futher largeish babies. Labour got shorter (3 hrs with the last) and had urge to push with rest. All siblings babies(5) thus far have been fairly large, 8lb 7 oz plus.

Expecting my second in Feb. Hopefully easier than the first. fingers crossed.

But jcp, a lot of what you describe is normal for a first time. Longer labour, baby late, lack of urge to push more likely to occur with first babies.

Large babies I can see having a genetic component though (and may explain the forceps/episiotomies bit).

I think it's probably pot luck. Therefore some people will have labours a bit like their Mum's, some exactly like it and some not at all like it.

me and my mum had almost identical births (and my grandmother as well). Early and short and starting suddenly, no build-up.

Oh I wish.

DM went to the park with her DS, at 7.25 she headed home to watch Corrie. Not in labour.

I was born before the commercial break 20 minutes later.

My DM has been in labour for under an hour in total and has four DCs.

I on the other hand gave birth to DD1 after 48 hrs, drips, episiotomy, forceps.

My Mum had 3 straightforward labours/deliveries.

I have had 2 Emcs....my cervix just doesn't dilate!

spookily my daughter was born on my birthday, at 7.30, I was born at 6.30.
Both me and my mum were induced for high BP and our labours were the same length....
I'm now pg again and this one's due the day before my brothers birthday, I'm just replicating my family!!!!!

My mum gave birth so easily I was nearly born at the traffic lights outside the hospital (according to her anyway).

I had a 50 hour labour followed by emergency (how can it be an emergency after 50 hours!!) C section.

Oh, and I had a perfect pregnancy up to that point.

So sorry, both false IME!

My Gran, Mum and myself all had really quick births.
My mum was induced with me, and I was born 1h 15m later. I was induced with DS, had 6h of 'not even as bad as' period type pains, the boredom was worse! Then I had 1h 15m, (same as my mum), of absolute agony before DS was born. The only difference was I needed stitches.
My mum was 2h with her 2nd, and 3h with her 3rd. My Gran was round about the same time scale with all three of hers as well, so I'm hoping if I have anymore DC that history repeats itself, which hopefully it should as it did with DS!

My mum and 2 sisters all had pretty normal straightforward natural(ish) births. I was overdue, induced, foetal distress, emergency section. I foolishly went into this birth thinking genetics was on my side. Afraid I'm no longer a believer of that theory.

My mum had three natural births, we were all overdue. I had a preemie by emcs after a three day labour so wish I'd had my mothers but nope!