Are you more likely to go overdue with back to back baby

[Sillylemonade1]

Both my first babies were 37+2 and 37+3, but were the right way round for a long time. This one was breech and is now head down, but at my appointment today (36+4) she is back to back.

Do most ladies who have back to back babies end up going over due? or is it more just a case of a possible lengthy labour?

I don't think a back to back baby means that you're more likely to be overdue and it definitely doesn't mean you're going to have a lengthier labour.

My first baby was back to back. My contractions started at about 8pm and she was born just after 11am the next morning. Pretty good going for the first!

Best of luck

My first was back to back and from first contraction to her being born was a little over 5 hours so I agree it doesn't always mean a longer labour. I sent myself crazy reading about how awful back to back labour was and trying so hard to get her to move. She was born 40+6. I don't remember reading anything about back to back babies coming later.

A lot can simply turn in labour too so stay back to back but don't actually come out that way, dd2 turned in labour. The only thing that was different with her was the early stage of labour was a lot more start stop so that but was slower as I believe it's because they out less pressure on your cervix so it often dilates more slowly xx

I had two back to back labours, one at 39+1 and one at 39+4.

They were both long labours.

Both mine were a few days early, and both labours were around 30 hours.

Mine was back to back and was early with a not too long labour

I went into 'slow labour' (very painful) with DD on a Tuesday and had her on Thursday evening. I was 42 weeks.

And was back to back.

I went into labour on my due date and my daughter was back to back (and transverse!). 33 hours until emcs.

Anecdotally, I went more overdue with my back-to-back baby than my other one, but I have no idea if that was the reason. If it helps, though, once I went into labour, although it wasn't comfortable, it was quicker than the labour with my other child.

Good luck OP

I was 2 weeks overdue with DC1 (not back to back) had to be induced and had a long labour ending in forceps.
DC2 was back to back, my waters broke at home 10 days overdue, gave birth 10 hours later. I know anecdotes don't mean much, but I don't think there's correlation with being back to back making you overdue

Both mine were B2B, first one two days overdue, second went from transverse to B2B and 10 days overdue. Both long labours with instrumental delivery.

Two back to back babies here. Both arrived exactly one week early.

My second was back to back, she was born on her due date in 51 mins

Both of mine were back-to-back. DC1 arrived one day early, DC2 arrived 9 or 10 days late. Their weights were almost identical, though.

My first was back to back took 26 hours to get to 4cm ended in EMC I think on the whole 'they' say back to back babies are longer labours