Waters broken before contractions!

[Nicknamegoeshere]

I'm 39 + 1 and mine started to go at 6 am this morning. Lots now, lovely and clear. But no contractions as yet! Did similar happen to anyone else? My midwife (home birth) says just to chill but that is easier said than done!!!

[Lxx16]

Yes and my contractions never started. I had to be induced 24 hours after they had gone. Contractions then came quickly but still ended in an emergency c-section. Baby was just not ready to vacate.

[Nicknamegoeshere]

@needaholidaynow She's seeing me again on Weds then will re-assess.

[Nonnymum]

Yes that happened in both my pregnancies. With the first I was induced as contractions didn't develop naturally, with the second contractions started about a few hours after waters broke.

[GreenWillowTree]

If I were you I would want to be reassessed way before Wednesday. Can’t she come tomorrow?

[Nicknamegoeshere]

@GreenWillowTree She's happy unless any signs of infection. Risk analysis is induction is riskier than watchful waiting.

[bloated1977]

There's no way I'd be waiting for Wednesday!! Let's just hope your contractions start soon. The risk to baby is greatly increased after 48 hours. When is your due date?

[IndecentFeminist]

Wow, Wednesday? That seems incredibly irresponsible.

[ElectricTonight]

I don't think waiting until Wednesday is watchful waiting to be honest. I had to have antibiotics when I didn't have signs of infection just to be on the safe side. Waiting until Wednesday would worry me so I hope things start this evening for you.

[Nicknamegoeshere]

I've researched it and actually not much further risk of infection, providing rules closely followed. It's a bit like co-sleeping - safe if strict protocols followed. Induction carries risks for sure.
I put my trust in my midwife and my IM team as experienced health care professionals.
Due date 29/5 but again I would not be induced after NHS guidance of 14 days but would leave until 43/44 weeks before reviewing.

[2007Millie]

The fact you're having to wait until Wednesday scares me.
I really hope you have a good outcome

[Nicknamegoeshere]

@2007Millie Could I ask why that is?

[Nicknamegoeshere]

I think we are all different. For example, I'm pro-cosleeping. I believe it is safest for baby PROVIDING all safety rules followed. Probably the majority of mumsnetters would disagree with me I'm guessing?

[ineedaholidaynow]

I didn't think you were meant to wait after 42 weeks. I remember a good friend of mine who had unfortunately suffered early losses was on a special parenting group and there were a number of parents on there who had suffered stillbirths because they had been induced post 42 weeks, and she always said she would always fight for an induction if she got to week 42.

[Lovelydovey]

Mine broke at 38+1 both times and both times hospital had me in to confirm this (using a pad as they didn’t want to do an internal before sending me away and telling me to come back 36 hours later for an induction if I wasn’t back before in labour.

1st time contractions started around 12 hours later and was back in hospital 12 hours after that with baby born after that.

2nd time I didn’t go into labour naturally. It turned out only some of my water had gone so they broke the rest and contractions started pretty soon after. Baby was born 8 hours later.

Both times because it had been over 24 hours since waters had broken I had to have over antibiotics during labour and then observations on baby for 24 hours before we could go home.

[ElectricTonight]

We are all different but I'm sure us Mother's all want the same thing, making sure our babies are safe.

I'm against Co sleeping for myself as years ago a family friends baby died as a result of the mother rolling on him and he died from suffocation, I could never forgive myself.

[GreenWillowTree]

I cosleep with my toddler. But I wouldn’t have a toddler if I had left it that long. He was born covered in meconium and needed to be resuscitated at birth. I know there are differences between trusts in who will let you go 24 and who will let you go 48 but to let you go to Wednesday with no checks in between, I am not sure there is evidence to support that.

[Nicknamegoeshere]

@ElectricTonight I absolutely agree. I also want what is best for my baby. Yes based on my research that may mean I feel different to some, but that doesn't mean automatically that I am wrong and they see right.

@Ineedaholidaynow Post 42 weeks the rate doesn't increase significantly. There is the option of additional scanning. I refused an induction with second son as blindly went in with having one with firstborn and I vowed never again. Induction by its very nature is pretty risky.

[Nicknamegoeshere]

@GreenWillowTree You're correct. I'm not under NHS care though.

[ElectricTonight]

I think people including myself are just concerned that you have to wait until Wednesday to make sure baby is ok, I'd definitely want to check babies heart beat tomorrow and the next day until labour has kicked in.

[ineedaholidaynow]

Do you think your IM is against induction as she wouldn't be needed if that happens? I would be getting a second opinion and I don't mean Dr Google. Not one person on here whose waters went before contractions started went past 4 days before being monitored in hospital. I understand your anxiety but I wouldn't be putting that before my baby.

[2007Millie]

OP, because all the evidence points to their being an increased risk to baby if they are left without any amniotic fluid.

And for what it's worth, I co sleep, and have done since day 1 for 19 months, so I do understand the evaluation of risks.

But when all the evidence points one way, I'm not sure it's a risk I would want to take

[GreenWillowTree]

I would definitely want to get the baby’s heart rate checked before Wednesday. Normally when you decline induction you get the baby’s heart rate checked every day.

[Birkenshock]

OP, my waters broke and no contractions had started within 36 hours. I was watching and tracking because - like you - I wanted a home birth. But after 36 hours (and I still had no temp etc) my Doula said the safest thing for baby was to get checked out in hospital. So I did. And I still had a natural birth in hospital with no VE's, but baby and I both required antibiotics.

Wednesday is a very long time to wait. 96+ hours after your water going is a huge risk to baby.

Would you consider thinking about what you most want to avoid, and working from that? For example, you'd be willing to go to hospital and started on antibiotics and for monitoring, but you aren't willing for VE's or intervention for another 36 hours etc.

[GreenOliveTree]

Another one who thinks you should be having antenatal checks daily if you're waters have gone. At my local trust if you declined augmentation you would be offered daily antenatal checks and CTG monitoring.

[Nicknamegoeshere]

@2007Millie Midwife assessed. Not all of my waters have gone and still lots around baby. Also (and I didn't know this until today), waters replenish themselves. I thought once they went that was it. Hence why I've got to stay well hydrated.