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

Babies born in amniotic sac?

40 replies

Jenski · 11/11/2008 16:54

I am almost 37 weeks pregnant with my third baby and with previous two my waters were broken (for no apparent reason other than to speed things along). My second labour was progressing faster than I could manage anyway, and I didn't feel that I was consulted prior to the midwife breaking the waters.

So I have heard of babies being born with the amniotic sac intact still and then broken on birth, and I was wondering if anyone had experience of this. Does this make labour more difficult?

Any information would be much appreciated as I am trying to write some things down in the form of a birth plan and would like as little intervention as possible.

Thank you

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Wallaroo · 11/11/2008 16:56

My friends DD was born like this. She said it was no way near as painful.

MmeLindt · 11/11/2008 16:57

My waters broke just moments before DD was born, so I don't see that it would be a problem.

Fwiw, this seems to be a "problem" in UK, I gave birth in Germany and never heard of anyone having the waters broken for them to speed things along.

pookamoo · 11/11/2008 16:58

No proper advice on this but I know my Grandma was born in her amniotic sac. In those days (90 odd years ago) they used to save them and sell them to sailors for good luck . It was called a "caul".

I think probably the waters would break anyway eventually rather than the baby being born in the sac.

NCbirdy · 11/11/2008 17:01

That happened to me, however I have no idea if it is better or not as I have never had them go earlier IYSWIM!

I can tell you that my labours were not at all difficult, they were quick, progressed well and the pain was managable (in a "tearing you in half" kind of way of course )

I am sure that is no real help sorry

I suppose the important thing is to try to get as good a realtionship with your MW as possible so they know what you are trying to achieve and the same for your birth partner - only more so as they are you advocate.

Now I am teaching you to suck eggs sorry

NCbirdy · 11/11/2008 17:02

sorry, we didn't have a caul (I was trying to remember the word!) they went when the head was delivered.

Cathpot · 11/11/2008 17:03

Midwife called 'she's bulging' as DD2 on way out. I thought I was about to have some important part of me fail in horrific fashion but it turned out that she just meant the sac was coming out with her, they cut it and she shot out!

Original poster

Jenski · 12/11/2008 12:29

Thank you all.

I am obviously hoping that my waters will break naturally but if not I will definitely ask for them to leave well alone.

Mdmlindt - interesting that this is not done in Germany.

NCBirdy - Yes definitely a good idea to get good relationship with MW. With my second baby I only met her 45 minutes before DD2 was born, hence the surprise at waters being broken when everything was moving so quickly!

Pookamoo - I do live by the sea, so I shall enquire with the sailors regarding the 'caul'

Bulging!

OP posts:

stretchmarkqueen · 12/11/2008 12:31

My dd2 was born in the caul!! It was very wierd!! And cool at the same time!

Poshpaws · 12/11/2008 12:33

DS3 was born 'in the caul'. It was by far my easiest labour and birth but don't think it was for this reason.

DH was at the 'business end'and he said when the sack came out, he could see this little face peering out at him . Once the sack was fully out, the midwife popped it and I heard reassuring wailing

Howdie · 12/11/2008 23:38

Anecodtally, a lot of midwives I have discussed this with feel that babies born in the caul cause less perineal damage - this makes sense to me. The last homebirth I attended, the baby was born underwater in the caul, it was fab, it was like she swam out in her own wee bubble!

Truffy18 · 13/11/2008 08:20

My second child was born in her waters and it hurt much less than my first. It does slow things down I was told by the midwife. She took 90 minutes to arrive from start to finish so it was a good job her waters stayed intact else she would have been born in the car!

It did mean however that they wouldn't let me give birth stood up (which I wanted to at the time cause it was more comfortable) because when the waters went they would have made the floor slippery and dangerous (I was told). I was disappointed about this cause I really didn't want to be lay on the bed.

honeybunmum · 13/11/2008 12:38

Truffy18, that sounds like it was more for their benefit than yours! I delivered my DD standing up at home in 40 mins with the midwife trying to break my waters as she was coming out, she couldn't and DD was delivered with sac intact. DS also delivered in sac in 20 mins by my DH in kitchen ( planned HB but not quite planned like that with no MW!!! ) so I don't think it really slowed things down.

Kiwifern · 30/11/2009 19:11

I've just had a baby who was born 'in the caul' which is when she was born inside her amniotic sac. It was a water birth - probably a double water birth really and was the best birth I could have asked for. 3 contractions once in the pool and a healthy babe was born. The only thing which was different from when my son was born in the water was when the midwife told me not to touch the head as she was crowning - as the midwife needed to break the sac from over her face. Either way she didn't take a breath until she was out of the water and is perfect in every way!!

Lulumama · 30/11/2009 19:14

if your labour is progressing normally, albeit a bit slow, then often breaking the waters is offered. not sure why they were broken for you if your labour was going too fast for you to cope

it does not harm babies to be born in the sac, and it will be broken and removed when they are delivered

you can put in your birth plan you do not wish for your labour to be augmented in any way unless there are compelling medical reasons, and specify you do not want your waters broken

2ChildrenPlusLA · 30/11/2009 19:20

Nope. It's less painful, but more of an explosion when broken

TheRedQueen · 30/11/2009 19:25

MmeLindt/Jenski : breaking the waters to speed things along IS done in Germany (or at least it was done to me when DD was born in Munich!)

nappyzonecantrunfortoffee · 30/11/2009 19:33

wow i thought the being born in the sac thing was a myth - im amazed and a little jealous - not so much i want to give it another whirl though you understand! Am of to ggole pics of babies inthe caul now.....

IckleJess · 30/11/2009 20:32

The reason 'cauls' were sold to sailors in years gone by is because it was said that a baby born inside it's caul would never drown. Therefore, owning a caul as a sailor was meant to bring them good luck and, more importantly I'd guess, immunity from drowning.

OrmIrian · 30/11/2009 20:34

You'll never drown.

moosemama · 30/11/2009 20:58

Dd was born with her waters intact last January. The midwife said its pretty rare, but not as rare as people think it is - they call them 'boil-in-the-bag babies'.

She was delivered in 1 1/2 hours from first contraction to arrival on the bed torpedo stylee. Waters broke as she hit the bed!

I was too shocked at how fast she shot out to check if the caul was still over her face once the waters had gone.

Her labour was definitely more painful than ds2's, but not as bad as ds1's. Although I think that was down to the shortness of the labour itself, as it was the contractions that were more painful not the pushing part iyswim.

TheProvincialLady · 30/11/2009 21:11

DS2 was born in the caul, in water at home. DH broke the caul and moved it away from his face (Ds2's face, that is). Unfortunately there was no magic perineum protecting effect...my bits are even more ragged than they were after DS1 with a nasty episiotomy. Mind you, he did shoot out like a rocket. My notes recorded the second stage as lasting 2 minutes!

EccentricaGallumbits · 30/11/2009 21:19

I've had a standing up, born in sack. she popped as the body slid out and made a shocking mess all over my trousers (i was doing the catching not the pushing). i had thrown down loads of towels anyway just in case, so no reason to have either standing up or intact membranes but not both.

trafficwarden · 01/12/2009 06:29

I love it when babies come like this, it looks incredible, like a minature diving helmet from the dark ages! Quite appropriate really.
When the membranes are intact the pressure from contractions is spread more evenly around the uterus and over the cervix. This should make labour progress more smoothly and women usually say it hurts more after the membranes break/are broken. Research has shown that rupturing the membranes reduces the length of labour on average by only 1 hour but lots of doctors/Midwives haven't taken it on board. If there is no progress in labour it is one of the things which is done to speed things up and needs to be done if syntocinon drip is required to reduce the risk of embolism but it should not be done routinely.

capstock · 01/12/2009 07:09

I've been wondering about this for hypothetical DC3 - DC2 labour was a bit too fast for my liking and midwife effectively broke the waters with a strong sweep, I would ask her to leave me alone next time as once the waters broke I was straight into transition and then the second stage of labour only took half an hour and I had a second degree tear (not sure I'm blaming that on her though and it's healed very well anyway).

PfftTheMagicDragon · 01/12/2009 08:21

DD was born in her waters, very fast.

Flip

1 2