Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Childbirth

Share experiences and get support around labour, birth and recovery.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

How long would you be prepared to go over 42 weeks to avoid induction?

50 replies

stillwaitingforbubba · 17/05/2007 20:03

I was induced with DD1 at 42 weeks exactly and it was horrible. I am keen to avoid it this time but at 41+1 already my chances dont look great of going into labour naturally before 42 weeks. I know some people wait til closer to 43 weeks to be induced but with all the risks associated with that I wondered what people's views were on how long to wait. My options will be 42+1,2 or 42+5,6 days....I guess I am wondering about 42+5 which will be the bank holiday monday.....

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

lulumama · 17/05/2007 23:01

cargirl..that is a different thing

i think when you go post dates, they call it expectant managing or something, and you do have daily scans and monitoring, to check placental function

LynetteScavo · 17/05/2007 23:10

With DD I was determined not to be induced, as I didn't want a hospital birth. (I was induced with DS2)
Acupuncture seemed to do the trick,(at 41+3)and I went into labour 24 hours after the treatment.
I would have given in at 42+3, as my sister could have taken time of work to look after DS's.

CarGirl · 17/05/2007 23:16

all they offered me was to come in and be monitored ie strapped to the machine and as they explained that only tells you that the baby is fine there and then. There was no mention of looking at my placenta, I honestly think they just don't want to do it.

RoundTheBend · 17/05/2007 23:21

I went to 42 + 11. No problems, just eager at the time to have my baby and asked to be induced and Consultant had no problem with that.

Original poster

stillwaitingforbubba · 18/05/2007 08:45

They have offered me a scan and CTG at 42 exactly then CTG every other day after then. So sort of monitoring but am aware things can change in between being monitored. My mum was 10 days late with me and 3 weeks early with my brother so not obvious women in my family have exceptionally long pregnancies....It is all so difficult!!

OP posts:

numptysmummy · 18/05/2007 08:53

I had a c.section with dd1 so was desperate not to be induced because of risks of further intervention etc. Went to 19 days over and was then induced and luckily it worked 1st time . With ds2 i went to 21 days over and went intp labour on my own. My consultant was v supportive and i went in every 3 days to be scanned to check fluid levels,blood flow from placenta etc.Just be sensible and listen to your baby i.e keep a track of movements etc. Have a theory that is's usually boys who are so late!

numptysmummy · 18/05/2007 08:57

Oh,also with dd2 (after the 2 really long pregnancies) i tried nipple stimulation and i swear it worked! Could really feel tightenings during and after. She was then born a wk early. Started them at about 38/39 wks.

DaisyMOO · 18/05/2007 09:04

Just to put the risks into some sort of context in case you don't already know - the risk of stillbirth at 42 weeks is 1 in 1000, rising to 1 in 500 at 43 weeks, so although the risk has doubled it is still quite low in absolute terms.

With regards to meconium that other people have mentioned below. As I understand it, meconium staining in a post dates pregnancy is a rather different issue from that in a term pregnancy. The presence of meconium can indicate that the baby is in distress, and this distress can also prompt a gasp reflex in the baby causing the meconium to be inhaled, which can be very dangerous.

In a postdates pregnancy the baby may empty its bowels just because they are full rather than because it is in distress and this in itself is less likely to cause problems than if it is because the baby is in distress.

It is a really difficult decision to make, all the best with it.

CarGirl · 18/05/2007 09:59

yes I know what you mean about meconium it was just that my baby refused to feed I think because she had a tummy full of thick meconium fluid that she wasn't interested in eating for such a long time, coupled with being well over 10lbs they just wanted to test her blood sugars regularly, got hassled into cup feeding her and in the end had to self discharge to escape. That was so much more worse than the birth! Suddenly being induced at 42 weeks didn't seem so bad. I also learned a lot from each experience, like you can refuse blood sugar testing, refuse catheter (I've never had one etc) but my confidence grew through experience not through knowing my "rights". Sadly I also have close friends who've had still births one who waited up to 43 weeks, another one at 38 weeks, another one 34 weeks all with placenta failure - that altered my views too.

Hopefully the OP has had some success with nipple stimulation and is now contracting!

Original poster

stillwaitingforbubba · 18/05/2007 10:01

Thank you. It is amazing how much people know and also how much this thread has already informed our decision making. i really appreciate it. Everyone has different tolerance levels i suppose. I just wonder whether my body knows how to go into spontaneous labour!!

OP posts:

Mossie · 18/05/2007 10:08

Still waiting I relucanatly agreed to induction at 42 weeks, mainly because I'd already used up loads of maternity leave and wanted the time to be with ds after he was born, also because going back and forth to the hospital every other day for monitoring would just have gotten ridiculous for me and for dh (he drives, I don't, so it would mainly have been him, as I was the size of a whale and public transport was difficult!!)

However, I had a really crappy time, and weighing the two options together (waiting a bit longer vs induction) I think waiting may actually have been slightly better.

HTH.

DaisyMOO · 18/05/2007 11:04

stillwaiting - I wondered whether my body knew how to go into labour - I'd never gone into labour spontaneously with my first 3 children and had ended up either being induced or having an elective cesarean. Baby no 4 though - I gave birth at 41+12, just two days after I'd always 'given in' in the past. Not being 'able' to go into labour is incredibly rare and if you've already laboured albeit with induction I would have thought that the likelihood of you not being able to is incredibly remote.

NineUnlikelyTales · 18/05/2007 11:15

I wanted to avoid induction and although I had agreed to it and booked for 42+5, DS arrived of his own accord at 42+6. Not a trace of meconium, apgar score after 1 minute a perfect 10!

I think most people tend to say they would not risk anything past 41 weeks, but I think the only important thing is how you feel. I knew that DS was fine, don't ask me how but I did. My consultant supported me and all the CTG traces I had after 42 weeks showed a very healthy baby. But if you feel doubtful you just have to go with your instincts.

I have said this before, but there is a risk in everything. How many of those people who would not risk going over 41 weeks would be happy to drive their baby home from the hospital in the car without giving a second thought? Or put the baby in its own room after 2 months? (Not trying to be horrible, just demonstrating that we have to weigh up for ourselves the risks of anything we do). I was happy with a 1 in 500 risk to my DS as 0.2% didn't seem such a very high risk to me. But no one can make that decision for you.

Hope all goes well for you wjatever you decide

dionnelorraine · 18/05/2007 11:35

I was induced with dd at 39 weeks. This was because I had obstetric cholostosis and it was potentially dangerous to go full term. I didnt find it that bad actually. Although it was a long labour. I went in on a thurs eve and she was born on a sat morn. I had bad prostin (i think thats the right word?)pains for a while. But because I had an epidural after, I was numb from waist down. Which was great!

Original poster

stillwaitingforbubba · 18/05/2007 12:59

I am encouraged that people think i might have it in me to go into labour! had decided on induction at 42+2 but now reconsidering 42+5!!! I too had the epidural last time as had to have drip but it made pushing so hard that i nearly lost my daughter as she got stuck and did not breathe for some time after coming out. I want to avoid if at all possible!

OP posts:

hayes · 18/05/2007 13:01

I was due my ds on Christmas Day, he didn't appear till 12th Jan so that was 42 weeks and 4 days....the fear of an induction next day put me into labour! Although my consultant did say he would let me go to 43 weeks......having said that my ds was 10lbs.....

CarGirl · 18/05/2007 13:05

The pushing is usually a lot easier & quicker with subsequent babies - honest even though mine jumped in size by 3lbs. Also if you end up being induced at 42+ it should work more quickly etc and if you can manage without an epidural you are so much more in tune with what's happening that the acutal birth bit is more controlled by your body doing what it needs to by itself.

Carry on with the nipple stimulation and find a reflexologist in the meantime!

bigcar · 18/05/2007 13:51

I was desperate for a home birth with dd3, so went to 43 weeks. I had to go in for monitoring every day in the last week but had to admit defeat at 43 weeks and was induced. It all went pear shaped and ended up in an emergency cs, mainly because she never dropped for some reason. My consultant was very supportive and was all for letting things happen naturally. Surely its more to do with what you are happy with, so long as you are well informed of any risks.

lulumama · 18/05/2007 13:53

it is far more likely you will go into labour than not !! as DaisyMOO said, to be truly unable to go into labour is very rare !!

you might need to go to 42 + 6 ..just an unknown quantity

;link{http://www.gentlebirth.org\natural induction tips here}

lulumama · 18/05/2007 13:53

natural induction tips here

Olissa · 18/05/2007 16:10

Next time I hope I'll have the patience to wait as long as it takes. DS was born at 42 + 1 by emCS after a failed induction.
I'd like to have a VBAC next time so no induction for me. I've found out since that we have plenty of 43 weekers in the family - the only person I'd spoken to about this before DS was born was my mum, and she was induced 3 times, twice earlyish for pre-eclampsia, so that wasn't any help!

That said I remember how hard it got at the end - I could get through the days but burst into tears every evening! I hope I'll have the strength to hang on in there.

Mossie · 18/05/2007 16:14

Olissa me too. Next time I'll start my maternity leave later so I don't feel so pressured. Although having said that by the end I could barely walk to the front door never mind the train!!

Original poster

stillwaitingforbubba · 21/05/2007 22:13

An update- I went into spontaneous labour and produced a baby girl on sunday morning so no need to worry about induction!! pretty happy about it all. thanks for advice people

OP posts:

lulumama · 21/05/2007 22:19

congratulations !! delighted to hear it....time for a name change ! xxx

babysmamma · 04/08/2009 20:06

I was induced with bby 1 at 42 weeks, one pessary and a few hours later there he was - no pain relief and fantastic labour.
he came out with one arm up so think it may have been his positioning that was holding things up. When they examined the placenta (i had a good nose too) it was all grey and gritty so in summary was starting to fail considerably.
From this experience i am booked in to be induced again at 42 weeks (this Friday) as i dont like the thought of them not getting enough from the placenta etc. Personal choice though - all the women in my family have longer 'cooking times'

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread