Baby back to back, how was it for you?

[northernjess]

Just wondering what your experiences are of these labours, this is no.3 for me and my first that is lying this way....Im 39 weeks and have tried all the old scrubbing floors, ball bouncing, bum in the air tricks...midwife says baby can turn as late as in labour, hey ho

one thing to try is to lay on your left side as much as you can, both of mine were bk to bk, my 2nd was coming to fast so had to go natural and i was on my hands and knees in labour that really helped, good luck xxxxx

mine was fine till they insisted on breaking my waters then suddenly difficult. If i had my time over there would be no way I would let anyone near me to do that. I had no pain in my abdomen - all in my back and arse/back of fanjo. I didnt get a chance to try getting in water/changing position to all fours etc on account of too much intervention but that seems to help a lot of people. best of luck x

northern jess I hope you don't mind my reply. dd2 was in a normal position throughout pregnancy. I was induced and after a while labour started - wham . It took 3.5 hours from first twinge to finish (second baby) but was 3.5 hours of constant pain. I found the contractions light relief from the pain/pressure between contractions. When she appeared face up everyone was very surprised. Later I realised it explained the between-contraction pain.

It was pretty quick but very intense. Compared to dc1 labour (24hours, ventouse) I prefered it.

I enquired vaguely afterwards why no-one had noticed. They said that baby had been normal position and had clearly only changed at the very last minute. Whether that's true or not I've no idea. (It's also worth noting that dd was nearly 10lbs - this may have been a significant contributing factor to the painful labour).

However I'll say again. Painful but short, preferable to a 24 hours labour. And to answer your op question, yes, my baby turned (albeit the wrong way!) well after labour had started.

So fingers crossed and good luck. 39 weeks is very exciting, even with dc3.

Had 3/3 back to back - it was fine. Maybe a bit longer than your 'normal' labour but fine (32, 16 and 6hrs established labour respectively). I have nothing to compare it to though. I am a total wimp but chose to do it all over again (twice!) so it must have been worth it in the end.

Mine wouldn't turn for anything! DC3 was perfectly positioned until the last few weeks when he went OP and stayed there - the other two were OP from early on.

DD was back-to-back nearly my entire pregnancy and for most of labour. Because I'd had horrible SPD I just couldn't cope with the contractions being in my back and ended up having pethidine and lying on my left side for a large part of my labour. Did the trick though, I went from 5-10cm in about two hours. Not sure if DD was still not fully turned or if I was just exhausted but it ended up being a ventouse delivery in the end as she just wouldn't come out. I'm really hoping that the babe I'm pg with now doesn't turn, he's been in the right position from the beginning.

I have had 2 back to back and both experiences were completely different. Nothing would turn them in pregnancy, but at least all the scrubbing made my floors sparkling! DD was overdue and I was induced, which was horrible, ended up with 14 hour labour and epidural and constant monitoring which left me lying on the bed. She did not turn and it took 2 hours to push her out. Ds was much much better, a really positive experience. He was still back to back when I went into labour but I had a very active birth, for the most part stood leaning against a hospital bed raised as high as it will go or leaning over a birth ball. He turned during labuor and the second stage took 8 minutes, where I was in a supported crouch with my partner behind me sat on a birth ball. I had wanted a waterbirth but my midwife (who was wonderful, and an active birth teacher too) said that it wasn't the best idea for a back to back baby. I really wish I had asked why. As it turned out they wouldn't have had time to fill the pool anyway! I think the key really is being upright.

FWIW I did the whole OFP thing throughout my pregnancy and DS turned back to back THE DAY BEFORE I WENT INTO LABOUR. grr. I had a 36 hour labour which was truly horrendous, but then again, I've only had the one baby so maybe it's just like that...? He did manage to turn around at about 32 hours in.

Thanks all, wonder why waterbirth not best idea for back to back baby? I had my other two in the water and would like to do the same again.....

i wonder if it is because a lot of women lay back in the water and leaning forward is better for OP babies

mind you , i woudl have thought that wherever a mother was comfortable would be the best bet !

You can still lean forward in a birth pool - on your knees hugging the side - very comfy i found

My first baby turned during labour because I spent the whole labour on my hands and knees, in the water bath.

DD2 didn't turn, but I was more in a reclined position, in the birthing pool, which is partly why I'm not getting a birthing pool this time round. The midwives turned her manually.

If still back to back during labour, dont let them break your waters too early, give baby chance to turn.

DD was back to back and I had most of my pain in my...ahem...arse. Tummy would go tight with the contractions but the pain would come in my back and arse. Was a very long labour too, 59 hours loooonggg.

I had a bad time with mine - lengthy back labour which felt like a pneumatic drill, and then he turned during the second stage, quite low down in my pelvis, which was the most horrible sensation in the world. Because he took so long to turn, my contractions died altogether four hours into the second stage, and I wound up with a ventouse due to maternal exhaustion - so much for the natural labour while staying upright etc...

I'd keep an open mind about epidural. No point killing yourself doing it naturally if you're just going to get too tired to get him out.

I had tis with second baby. No-one told me at the time and no-one even mentioned trying to turn her. it was only when I mentioned to the midwife who visited me at home that the contractions had been more intense than with DS that she looked at my notes and said it was because DD was back-to-back. Apparently always had been too, just no-one had thought to tell me. It was a v. quick labour though - am not sure what to say about the pain but as I was lying down throughout with legs in stirrups it was probably made worse by position. Again, my requests to walk round were refused as they wanted me lying down as i had a bit of a blood pressure problem. In the end I had forceps and epidural as she got stuck, but i think that was more my shape than being OP as my first baby got stuck just at the exit point as well! So all in all it was a bad experience but that was entirely down to the hospital staff and not to the fact she was OP if you get my meaning! I think forewarned is forearmed and all that!

DS2 was back to back all the way through my pregnancy and did not shift- didn't turn either and was born facing the "wrong" way. My labour was more intense with him, the contractions were more...ouchy....(if that makes sense!) but not in my back. I remember at the start of labour thinking "ouch yes this feels familiar I remember now what contractions feel like" and then a bit further in thinking "oh my god they didn't hurt like this last time round owwwwwww!"

Established labour was 4 hours long, (ds1 4.5) so hardly a long drawn out affair either.

So yes it made a difference but not a dreadful one.

Just had DD2 on friday, she was posterior but no one mentioned it until I was in labour. It was pretty painful, contractions were much more intense than with DD1. I started out in the water but had to get out after 3 hours as nothing was happening. Got to 8cm and stuck, eventually an OB came in with HUGE hands and did SOMETHING up there and 10 mins later I was pushing. Pushed for 11 mins and she was out. Apparently he turned her somehow because she was the right way up in the end.

It was pretty painful and the midwife said it would have been much shorter (12 hours altogether) if she had been in a better position.

Worth it though!

My LO keeps on turning from one day to the next - posterior until 39 weeks, then turned, last week posterior, yesterday 'right way', this afternoon posterior again. And I am 41+1. There is still time to turn! I just don't know how to keep this LO where I want him to be! I am doing all the right things!

I'm the same EEC and currently 40+4!! It clearly means that there's enough space in there for them to turn ok, so we just have to trust that they'll turn in labour if they need to...fingers crossed!

I had a back to back labour with DD2 and a waterbirth too. The water was great for easing the pain, which as others have said was all in the back. Hubby god a bad wrist from rubbing my back all the time. Established labour was very short for a b2b labour - only 3 hours until I delivered. However, I suffered a very bad third degree tear, which almost two years on I am still trying to recover from. Don't know if that is why they don't recommend a water birth, because by nature they are very hands off?

I too had a back-to-back labour with dd2 but spent most of it upright leaning over a birthing ball like littlelamb, which certainly helped. It was so straightforward, I was delighted - I had an EC with dd1 which I found much more difficult in lots of ways.

FWIW I spent 4 months sitting on the bouncy ball to watch telly every night, sitting on a backwards chair at my desk, doing yoga, getting on all fours at the drop of a hat, and she remained resolutely in that position throughout. The upside was a tiny bump!

My midwives at the Homerton ( about six different women came and went) didn't seem to know I had a face up baby. My waters broke three weeks early and had a job persuading the maternity ward I was in labour in the first place as they think women don't know the difference between waters breaking and being incontinent (not that I had ever been incontinent!). I was in severe unremitting pain for ten hours - the last three of which my baby was stuck in the birth canal. I was out of control/knackered wih pain after about six hours so just let the midwives lie me on the bed and accuse me of not pushing properly (not true, he was a big baby, my first one and sunny side up as it turned out). Next they wheeled me off somewhere else for the interventions - ventouse and deep cut. Baby came with first push after that. Good job as they were threatening a caesarean if I couldn't deliver within five minutes. I lost a lot of blood which no-one noticed and needed transfusions a few days later when I started getting chest pains and breathing problems from severe anaemia. My baby thankfully was alive after all that but developed grunting/breathing problems soon after the birt and ended up being in the SCBU for eight days (he got jaundice and then they wanted to make sure he could feed as well as breathe so fed him bottles - no breast feeding possible after that week :-(). Then, because I was distressed and sometimes volatile due to my baby being in special care and me being in a terrible maternity ward (lazy nurses, filthy ward) in too much pain/ too weak to go and be with him all the time they asked a psychiatrist to come and see me as they thought maybe I had post natal depression. The psychiatrist thought my feelings were understandable given the birth, the SCBU separation, the nurses not bothering to give me pain relief etc! Sorry this is not a good story but I write it in the hope that if any women out there suspect they have a baby back to back and are not getting good enough labour support BE VOCAL about it, get help to stand up in labour or ask for an experienced midwife to help you turn the baby. Good luck I'm sure it doesn't have to be as bad as my experience.