Speedy childbirth - is it hereditary?

[GoBigOrange]

I'm 31 weeks right now, so my family are starting to discuss their experiences with me. Rather than telling me horror stories though, they are all telling me how swift and easy it will be.

None of them (my mum, two aunts and four cousins - with thirteen births between them) will claim a labour which lasted longer than six hours, and most of them went from first contraction to baby in two hours or less, even with their firstborn. They are all convinced that I will stick with 'family tradition' and deliver quickly too.

Is there any truth in what they're saying or is this a load of old wives type bollocks? Just wondering if I should be warning DH to brush up on his fast driving and baby catching skills before July

In my case, it was not hereditary. I got the same stories as you. I am the first in my family to have a c-section after a 30 hour full on labour - this includes my whole of extended family. Then to follow on with that act, I had twins (conceived naturally). The first set of twins on either side of the family ever.

So it is not always as such, but keep the positive attitude as one story is not the same as the other. It helps to know what the possibilities are and then write your own story.

There is a link between how your mother laboured and how you will labour but it's generalised. You can't rely on it. If your mother and her mother before her and on and on, had short, uncomplicated labours you're probably slightly more likely to.

My family all had short, easy labours. No longer than 6 hours. No pain relief.

My labours were 31 and 38 hours respectively and both ended in emergency caesareans.

Nobody in my family had my pelvis or had to deliver my babies.

My labours aren't horror stories btw. DS in particular (the longer of the two) was a lovely, positive, life-affirming experience.

Don't think of longer labours or intervention or even cs as a horror story as ironically, it's often this perception that can lead to people suffering birth trauma. We have lots of really helpful labour interventions which are used to prevent birth trauma and injury. They might not be the "ideal" but they can be positive experiences. The key is to know what they are, to exercise your own choice about when they're appropriate, to feel supported and informed and to accept that labour and delivery come down to luck in the main.

My Mum had three straightforward deliveries and I had two emergency C sections.

I hate to provide another counter example (bear in mind people like us might be more likely to post on your thread?) but I was expecting to be similar to my mother - her labours were 5 hours and one hour. Mine was 20 hours induced then emcs. All fine and healthy afterwards btw - cs is far from a negative outcome.

My mum had short labours, I had a 2 hour labour, my sister had a monster nearly 50 hour labour!

My mum only had me, apparently she coughed and I came out.

I, on the other hand, from first pain to birth was in labour for nearly 50 hours with DC1.

Fern, my Mum is always tutting about women who make a fuss in labour. She finished decorating whilst in labour, walked the 2 miles to the hospital, sneezed her baby out and then walked home (most of this is true to be fair). The problem is, she's bloody dismissive of any other experience. So if you found it a bit ouchy or it took longer than an episode of Eastenders, you're just being awkward.

Don't ever let there be a weight of expectation on you op. Your family are probably lovely and being reassuring but don't let them tell you what 'will' happen. Take comfort in their positive experiences, enjoy their stories and wait for what will happen for you and your baby.

Interesting. Thank you all.

I shall take their stories with a pinch of salt then if there is no particularly strong correlation, and go back to having no expectations.

They're a good bunch and probably are trying to be reassuring by telling me how quick and easy it all was for them - but I actually found the idea of a panicked high speed dash to the hospital for a sneeze-birth more worrisome than appealing, as I'd be a trifle concerned about not making it in time!

My doctor and his team are great, and the hospital I'm delivering at has an excellent reputation for their maternity department, so I'm thinking I'll be in good hands no matter how long it does or doesn't take.

Firstly, I'd say they might be exaggerating the speed. I can hardly remember much about DD's birth and that was only two years ago.

But, for me, I had an easy albeit fucking painful and relatively quick labour with DD. Less than 10hr from first twinge to squeezing her out. My mother and sister also had straightforward, quite quick births. We also all take a bit longer than usual to cook (I went to 40 + 13 with DD).

My mum had a five day stop start labour with me that ended up with her being knocked out and me being removed by forceps (she should have been sectioned tbh). I was 10lbs.
My aunt also had long labours and big babies. I was told I would have long labours and huge babies.

I did have a long early labour with dd1 but she was back to back. Active labour was recorded at less than three hours though as once it got going it happened quickly. She was 8lbs 2.

Dd2 was 24 hours from first twinge to birth, again with around a 2.5 hour active labour. She was 6lbs 14oz.

I guess my point is that my mum's experience, and her sister's, of long labour and big babies had little bearing on my experience.

X

I also come from a family of quick labourers (to varying degrees). Also all babies on my mother's side born well before the full forty weeks. The one thing that's useful to bear in mind in case you DO end up inheriting quick labours is that your pain relief choices are more limited. My mum had me (first child) really quickly, I was almost born in a pub, and there was no time for an epidural - she said she would have taken one, but I was born half an hour after she got to hospital. My sister's birth was similarly fast. So I was prepared that an epidural might not be possible, which I think was quite helpful for me mentally.

In the event, it was my sister who had the quick birth when her DD was born (at 5am when she called in to say she was experiencing first contractions, midwives told her to try and get some sleep and come in in later in the morning - thank goodness she didn't listen, my niece was born by 8am). My births were slower but still not really slow. I got the most of the early baby genes though - my first was born at 33 weeks, second at 36 weeks.

Everything that the others have posted here is true - it helps to be prepared for all eventualities, and not to be fixated on any one kind of outcome!

All of my mothers labours were days long and she was overdue on all of us.

With DD from first twinge to her being born - 27 minutes! And eight weeks early.

They say the second labour is even quicker - no more babies for me, thanks

I had a quick first labour of only 2 hours but my sister was 2 days so complete opposite ends of the spectrum. Seem to recall my mum was pretty much average with us at about 10 hours.

Worked for me. Quick, straightforward births for grandma, mum, aunt and me.

My mum was 6 hours with both me and DSis, I was 4 and a half hours with DD. Midwife saked me at my 38 week appointment to ask my mum as she though my labour might be similar to hers, so maybe there's something in it!

definitely not true for me.
my mother had all very speedy deliveries under 2 hours. 3 babies she had.
with my first I was almost 2 days in labor. Second was faster maybe 8 hours.

My mum had quick deliveries. Me too. First was 2 1/2 hours after I got to hospital.
Wishing you well for your birth. x

In my case the length of my births were hereditary. Both my nan and my mum had 7 hour labours first time round and then 4 hours second time. Mine were 7 hours and then 3 hours second time round! Although I think every body/baby is different. Good luck :)

I think in my family it is hereditary. My labours have all been short (5hr40, 1hr50, 45 mins). My mum had high bp and was induced with all four of us. Despite this however, her labours were still very fast. As she was monitored, she also knew that she never really felt anything until she was 4-6cm dilated. My maternal grandmother didn't even know she was in labour until she was informed by a nurse (she was in hospital already being monitored for a heart condition she had). One MW I saw told me that she has often asked mums to be about their mothers' and sister's experiences of labour, and has often seen a correlation between what they tell her and their own subsequent experiences.

I would say it's definitely no guarantee of anything, but not to be surprised if yours is similar. Don't pin your hopes on it, but make sure you get to the hospital quickly.