Page 2 | Refusing an induction - Have I done the right thing?

bebespain · 2006-12-12T13:20:09+00:00

I'm 40 wks today and will be having baby in Spain. The Spanish doctors have put my dates 2 weeks on because baby is 'big', they want to induce me tomorrow. I really feel I should be left a bit longer so refused to be induced when I went to hospital today. Now I'm really worried that I've done the wrong thing. I don't want to endanger baby but feel I should give him chance to come by himself - any opinions?????

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

VoodooKumquat · 14/12/2006 22:23

15 weeks???????????????????????????

or 15 days!

VoodooKumquat · 14/12/2006 22:26

nellycake I am so in the same boat as you regards the birth...

Iwish I had left it longer but itnever occured to me you could say No!

I could cope with gas and air and pethidene, but I ended up having a spinal block anyway as I needed a D&C immediately after the birth for a retained placenta issue...having my spine messed with was the worst worst bit, I was exhausted after the birth and terrified.

talcam · 14/12/2006 22:55

Totally your choice whether to be induced or not but how can you stand waiting any longer?

I was induced with both babies 1st was great 4hrs 30mins only used gas and air so it can be positive experience too!

2nd one ended up a section coz the bugger got her hand stuck in the way. I also think I am missing some hormone or something.

Does anyone know if this would mean I couldn't be induced with a 3rd and have to be a section if I don't go into labour myself?

Daisymisletoe · 14/12/2006 23:08

I also thought I was 'missing' something that meant I didn't go into labour naturally, but I now know that some women just have longer pregnancies! I had an induction at 41+10, an elective section at 41 weeks (because I was so traumatised by my induction experience) and another elective section. For my fourth I just waited a little bit longer and went into labour completely naturally at 41+12. I hate the fact that post-dates inductions make some women feel their bodies are 'faulty'

Talcum, whether or not you are induced after c-section depends on your consultant - some are willing provided you are aware of the increased risks of uterine rupture, others aren't. If you are dilated enough just to have your waters broken then they could certainly do that, although this doesn't guarantee you will go into labour.

lulumama · 14/12/2006 23:13

some babies need to be in utero longer

38 - 42 weeks is normal range ..but we get hung up on the due date, which is in itself an estimate, based on a 28 day cycle, which of course, not every woman has....

as long as the baby is happy in utero, and there is adequate amniotic fluid and placental funciton, there is no need to induce

you cannot be missing a hormone to go into labour......labour is triggered by a complex cocktail of hormones, partly secreted by the foetus....

you need the confidence and support to hold on longer if neccesary.....!

if your first baby was born 40 + weeks and your family tend to labour after 40 weeks, then you are more likely to ....

lulumama · 14/12/2006 23:18

there is less scope for induction after c.s..there is a slightly increased risk of uterine rupture with the use of syntocinon to stimulate contractions , and the protocols can vary from hospital to hospital ...hanging on for a spontaneous labour is preferable as indcution itself makes labour often a lot more medicalised ....

MKGnearlyimmaculateconception · 15/12/2006 00:48

I think it all depends on your cervix and if it will work with you or not. I read somewhere recently that pitocin (syntocin in UK) causes contractions, but doesn't necessary dilate your cervix. (I don't know if anyone else has read this) If your cervix doesn't open then you'll be a "failure to progress" if it is favorable it should be a good induction.

I had a great induction. It was straight forward, epidural free, and didn't need forceps or vacuum.

lulumama · 15/12/2006 11:25

the point of syntocinon, is to stimulate contractions, those contractions should dilate the cervix........if they don;t then they can increase the levels of the drug...and then if still nothing happens, yes, failure to progress, most likely exacerbated by being bed bound with a drip and monitor

carrotcake · 16/12/2006 11:34

Hi Bebespain, I posted about this yesterday on the pregnancy thread, was about to post here and saw yours, quite similar situation, wanting to refuse induction but the underying fear about the rupture risk has kept me awake last night, not helped by the language used, 'if you rupture we have five minutes to save your baby', in front of dd1! I was quite confident about having a vbac but the stand in midwife yesterday seemed horrified that I thought I coud go to term+10, she said the consultant that I'm under always induces at term. I thought it was catagorical that you couldn't be induced with vbac, but she said they'll try one induction attempt and break waters and then do a section if nothing happens. This seems unnecessary to me, particularly as their dates are a week earier than my menstrual dates which is regular as clockwork. I'm 36 weeks and seeing the consultant on wednesday but I don't want everything to be a battle, she also said no birth pool, comtinuous moniitoring and only pushing for half an hour!
I also said he felt quite low, and she said 'oh it's a bit early to have dropped' and then 'oh, seems to have engaged', like we don't know anything as mothers... sigh, going with kids now to see wizard of oz on the big screen, might take my mind of this anyway...
hope you're feeing more positive

FrostyTheSnowMarsLady · 16/12/2006 11:43

carrotcake that is OUTRAGEOUS! NO mother should be spoken to or treated like that!

If that is the attitude that they take then I'm very concerned for the women that go there to give birth. Sadly I'm far too tired to even begin to suggest what I think that you should do. Lulumama will come back and tell you all that I want to I think!

I repeat absolutely OUTRAGEOUS!

Daisymisletoe · 16/12/2006 14:41

Carrotcake, I'm absolutely horrified by what your midwife has been saying on so many levels. Firstly, as far as I know, there is no evidence that uterine rupture is more common after 40 weeks. If your consultant tells you it is - ask to see the evidence. Some women just labour later than others - 40 weeks is an average, which by definition means that some women will have longer pregnancies. The less ready a woman's body is to go into labour, the more likely it will fail and lead to c-section.

You are right that induction is often advised against after a previous cesarean because of the higher risk of uterine rupture associated with prostaglandin (cervical ripening agents) and IV oxytocin. That doesn't necessarily rule it out, but you should be told the risks and given the choice to wait longer. You don't even have to look at induction/c-section at 40+10. The risk of stillbirth is still very low and many hospitals don't even consider inducing until 42 weeks.

I think it is true that uterine ruptures are more likely to happen at the end of the first stage or during the pushing stage as the lower part of the uterus becomes thinner. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that you should only be 'allowed' 30 minutes to push. If you and the baby are fine, you are making progress and there are no signs that a problem might be brewing, I cannot see any reason to immediately go to c-section.

As for 5 minutes to save your baby - this is known as 'shroud waving' and is deeply unethical. It is also complete bullsh*t. The evidence is that if a baby is delivered within 20 minutes of uterine rupture 90% will be fine.

I am immediately wary of anybody who uses the words 'must' 'allowed' and 'cannot'. This is your body and your baby and it is YOUR decision whether to be induced, continously monitored etc etc. You deserve and should be given the facts and allowed to make your own informed choice about how you want your birth managed.

I would strongly recommend the vbac yahoo group for more advice and support from people who've been through the same thing.

lulumama · 16/12/2006 17:48

ta daisy! everything daisy said , she said it better than i could!

the your baby might die card is an absolute disgrace..of course you then feel obligated to agree to whatever they suggest, as who would put their baby at risk

so insulting an obs thinks they know your menstrual cycle better than you...

you do not have to agree to be induced! it is your body and your baby and if you can make an informed decision to refuse consent, then so be it.

inducing at term????? why??? 38 - 42 weeks is within the realms of the 'normal' length of pregnancy!

of course there is a risk..but there is a risk in every pregnancy and you need to be given the information, without the threat of your baby's life hanging in the balance , to be able to stand firm and go for what you know is right for you.

our hospital protocol - induction with gel, 2 x doses, possibly oxytocin, and continual monitoring and pushing for 1 hour.....so it varies from place to place, leading me to believe that some hospitals more liberal and open minded to labour differing from woman to woman, rather than 30 minutes being safer than 60 minutes, IFYSWIM!

i would second daisy;s suggestion of the VBAC group..i have just joined , they are a marvellous group !

terrible shame some health care providers seek to disempower and terrify women ......at least you have some peer support here though !