My 1st was back to back, 36hrs, horrendously painful, sick on every contraction, had every paIn relief going. My 2nd was undiagnosed frank breech, literally found out when she was 'crowning' and pooed all over the bed lol!!!! Her labour was 1hr50, only had gas and air, it hurt but was bearable and didn't need the pain relief I needed on number 1!
On the face of it, I'd take the second labour, bum 1st, 1 million times over first labour.
However,
- I was lucky!!! Breech birth is undoubtably more risky (friend is a nicu nurse and told me after a lot of the babies she sees are result of breech birth).
- The panic I felt (and so did everyone else who flooded into the tiny room) when they realised I was breech was terrifying.
- At the end, although glad I didn't have a c section as all was ok, I found it really scary that the outcome could have been very different!
I think what I'm trying to say is, although in my experience, breech labour was a breeze in comparison to head first first baby, I was lucky. It could have been very different! My first back to back labour was hell and I wouldn't wish that on anybody. I was traumatised for weeks after and wish I'd had a c section as it was an ordeal! I know csection and after recovery isn't a piece of cake, however, I felt so shattered after my marathon, had stitches in places that shouldn't have stitches, and a tired baby who took a week to feed properly, I wished I'd just had a c section as back to back made it so difficult!
Also, although number 2 was easy in comparison, breech is always risky and would have chosen a c section if I'd known about it before labour started!!!
I'm waffling, don't even know if any of this was useful, but, in essence, choose a c section and save yourself the stress of picking a 'risky labour!' Hand on heart, I would choose the planned c section x