Induction at 40 weeks because I'm 42 years old. Anyone else?

[Thatsnotmyfigure]

I thought I knew all our hospital's policies on 'older mums' (Grrrr) as I was 40 with DC1 . It turns out this time they want to induce me at term (which is 4 days before term according to my dates, but that's another story!).
The consultant quoted some research on failing placentas in older mothers. Has anyone read this or knows where I could find this? I'm sure there was some new research a year or so ago that said older Mums have longer pregnancies, but I also dont know where to find this
Don't get me wrong - I absolutely do not want to take any risks, but the consultant was very authoritarian and patronising and left me feeling without choices. Last time round I delayed induction till 41+6 and had a show, then one intervention and a normal delivery. My pregnancy is totally normal so far so the only reason they want to bring the induction forward to 40 wks is my age. I have had so many friends who've ended up in the cascade of intervention and not had positive birth experiences. It just provokes quite an angry reaction in me - I'm not even sure why!
Has anyone else had induction suggested at term because of age?

[Thatsnotmyfigure]

Wee onion I am also in a similar position ad you but not so extreme as they moved my due date back 4 days which means inducing before term potentially. Good luck with the home birth plans!

[Thatsnotmyfigure]

Daffy Duck that is a fantastic story! Congrats!

[doodledotmum]

No mention of it with either of mine but second child was in 2011 so before that research - may well have changed now

[christinarossetti]

A friend at a hospital in West London was advised that they offer induction at term to all women who are 38 or over at their due date. This was in 2008 or 2009.

Don't know how widespread this practice is.

FWIW, I had 3 very straightforward inductions (for psychological reasons rather than age, although I was 39 when I had my last baby) and the chances of a straightforward induction increase significantly if you are close to your due date and have delivered vaginally before.

Different decisions are right for different people. Induction was definitely right for me (couldn't have coped with the anxiety of being overdue after dc1 was stillborn) - all 3 births involved pessaries/tablets, no drips, no being confined to a bed, no pain relief and no tearing. Labours varied between 3-8 hours.

[TondelayoSchwarzkopf]

I had a good induction as well, only the pessary, 12 hours from start to end and a fast labour with no intervention.

But everyone is individual and their own experiences need to inform the choice as much as the research and policies.

[LaVolcan]

I couldn't help but notice this statement from the BBC article:

Inducing at 40 weeks could prevent seven stillbirths a year, if an extra 4,750 women were induced, they said.

There is no mention at all of the extra risks an induction might pose to the ~678 women who would need to be induced at 40 to save the one stillbirth. There definitely needs to be a discussion about the balance of risks for each woman involved and not just a blanket policy.

[Tranquilitybaby]

You don't have to do anything you don't want to do. If you don't want to be induced at 40 weeks, don't, there's nothing the can do about it. You might be asked to go in for daily monitoring but that's it.

You can also have a home birth if you want to, they'll have to support you.

Have a look at the AIMS website x

[DaffyDuck88]

AAhh! TheTertiumSquid! Thats it! Thankyou, its been doing my head in trying to remember it!

[DaffyDuck88]

Thanks for the congratulations OP! . Really glad to read you are standing your ground! Even more so that the midwives are on your side. Trust your instincts and do what you feel is best. If I'd gone over I'd have been happy to go to the hospital each day to be monitored to make sure all was well but I wouldn't have consented to an induction without a valid reason. As it was there were no concerns throughout the pregnancy and I was accepted to use the Birth Centre. Of course had anything changed and REAL (not theoretical) risks presented themselves I would have had to reconsider - as we all would, we're not stupid, just having a baby and wanting to do it the best way possible for both parties! I shall keep checking to see how you go. Very best of luck!

… all this is making me very broody indeed

[newmumwithquestions]

Glad to find this thread. I'm 40 and pregnant with no 2, saw my consultant last week who TOLD me I would be induced at 40 weeks. I wasn't researched enough to argue but did say I would rather have a sweep at which point she said that's fine we'll do that at 39 weeks (why???). I had a straightforward pregnancy and natural labour at 41+1 with no 1, which was only last year and although it's too soon to say I'm not showing any signs of problems so far with this one.
So I don't get the turn around just because I'm a year older.
I don't want to do anything that will endanger this baby but at the same time I'm already feel pressurised.
So I will check out the links posted (thanks to the posters) but if anyone else comes across any validated research (not daily mail ) can they please share. Thanks

[CazY777]

Please don't let anyone tell you that you are 'not allowed' to go over 40 weeks. I had this during the whole of my pregnancy as I'd just turned 40 when I had my booking appointment. It seems to me that this is driven by the threat of litigation rather than actual knowledge or common sense. When I asked various hcps what this actual 'small' risk of increased stillbirth was they couldn't tell me. From what I found on the internet it's an increase of 0.3 per cent (i can't remember where I found the research) so opted for monitoring after 40 weeks, I went in every 3 days. I also refused to see the consultant after the first visit as all it did was cause me stress, I had a perfectly normal and healthy pregnancy despite being old!
I did end up being induced at 40+5, which I only agreed to because Dd was predicted to be 9 pounds by the scan I had. It didn't work (I believe because my body wasn't ready as they brought the date forward at my 12 weeks scan though I was sure of when my last period was, and because they stressed me out so much) so I had a c-section. Healthy baby girl but a lot of stress to get there and I've been completely put off having any more!!

[CazY777]

It was 41+5 by their dates, but 40+5 by mine

[ohthegoats]

Yes, I would have been induced (I was 40) on my due date had I gone along with what the consultants wanted. Just remember that there are no maternity police, no one is going to turn up and drag you to an induction appointment. If you read about the risks and decide that you are willing to take them, then just stand your ground. I ended up going in to labour after a sweep and the baby arrived at 42+1. I actually had a feel of the placenta to find the grainy stuff that I'd been told was a sign of it breaking down, and couldn't find anything. The student midwife who was playing with it with me said that there was no sign of it aging.

[newmumwithquestions]

This article on Cochrane seems quite good - basically saying that induction reduces the chance of stillbirth - but for everyone, not just for mums over 40. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004945.pub3/abstract;jsessionid=758AA6BC834FB4E9E8E981D58191D503.f01t02

There is loads on there although I'm struggling to find one that tells me exactly what I need to know. I have to admit some of my desire not to be induced is fear. With no1 I went straight into hard labour (from the start my contractions were over a minute and less than 5 mins apart). I dilated faster than 2cm an hour which is pretty fast and I know second labours are often faster, I tore and expect to again - sorry to scare those that are on .no1 - you cope and overall I had a 'good' labour - baby healthy. But I really don't want drugs adding to the speed I may deliver at. I'd just like the consultant to look at this, and my overall health before making a blanket recommendation based on my age, make a recommendation based on all my history (you know - be a consultant!).

I spoke to the midwife I had at my last apt and she was very supportive of me not being induced so I'm going to talk it through with my consultant at the next appt. Lets hope her manner is somewhat better than appt no 1!

[Belleende]

I am just out the other side of this. I am 40 and just moved to the lister area. They wanted to induce me at 39 weeks, I read the research and agreed to 40.
What pissed me off was that all along the line they assured me that I could go to the mlu as long as the pessaries worked ( I. E not on the drip). The hospital then changed their mind as I was waiting to have my waters broken. I thought this was out of order.

I had a v interventional birth played out over a looooooonnnnggg 6 days which is not what I wanted. However, during the actual birth the midwifes with me helped me make the most of a crappy situation and helped me keep some control at vital points.

All in all it is not the birth I would have chosen, but I have a beautiful perfect daughter.

If I had to do it again, I think I would have delayed the induction for as long as possible (I had a v normal pregnancy), but I think no more than 41 weeks.
I would also have talked to the clu midwives about induced labour and how to keep control. The midwifes at one point had the consultant trapped out in the hall brandishing forceps whilst I pushed with all my might. They also had to overrule him on the epiesotomy.

It is a really hard call. I made v conservative choices in line with medical advice and against my instincts but I am a 1st time mum with several miscarriages behind me.

[newmumwithquestions]

Thanks for sharing Belleende. Wow - 6 days - you must be made of strong stuff.
Enjoy your beautiful perfect daughter. :-)

[Momtobetono2]

How did your induction go? I am also scheduled for an induction at 39 weeks with my 2nd baby and previous vaginal delivery at 40+weeks

[HighNetGirth]

This happened to me at Queen Charlotte’s in London. A scrawl on my notes announced I would be induced at 38 weeks due to my age (40). When I asked for an appointment to have this explained to me I got a very very snotty doctor who had no decent data to share but was incredibly rude. So I was rude back and refused. In fact, I was induced at 40 weeks for other reasons.

Second time around I was treated much more respectfully but still invited to agree to be induced at 38 weeks. The information used to justify this had not improved in the intervening 2 years, which I found pretty disappointing. I refused again and went to 40 weeks. In the event, I had to have a Caesarean.

Because proper monitoring will probably not be offered (I think the policy partly exists to avoid the need for resource heavy monitoring) you face a fairly unpalatable choice. Do the best you can to decide but don’t let anyone bully you into a particular approach.