If you go past your due date and you aren't induced... what actually happens?

[HeadFairy]

My uncle asked me this earlier (he hasn't got children), his question was that the human body was so good at doing things at the right time etc... so what happens if you aren't induced. I know the placenta starts to break down if it's left too long, but what effect will that have? Would the body recognise what was happening and start labour? What happened in the past when the docs didn't know how to induce labours?

what happened before is that more woman and children died in childbirth.

Inducement has been around for a long time though.

Really? is that what happened? How terrible! Considering how many people go past their due date and are induced, that must have been so many women and babies (sorry, not terribly cheery subject for this time of year) Why doesn't the body's natural responses kick in and start labour off?

statistically I have no idea what the infant mortality rate was due to failed placenta, there would be no way of knowing as there wouldn't be the records would.

A pregnancy is "full term" between 37 & 43 weeks placenta failure can happen at anytime though I presume it is fairly rare.

Post 40 weeks I should think eventually nearly all women would go into labour however at what point the balance tips into the infant mortality rate increasing significantly noone knows because there are no studies.

100 years ago the infant mortality rate and the maternal death rate were shockingly high it was a very risky business. In today's society were are seem to be lulled into a false sense of security that pregnancy leads to live & healthy baby and live & healthy Mum.

I have 3 friends who have had still born babies, one placenta failure at 42+ weeks, one at 37+3 due to a blood disorder that stopped oxygen passing through the placenta, most recently placenta failure at 36+5

Only one of those would have been prevented by induction due to be "overdue"

mine were all "overdue" and induced. The longest I waited was 17 days there were signs that the placenta was just about starting to decay and there was very thick meconium in my waters that had obviously been there for days.

Had I have waited then yes I probably would have gone into labour naturally and had a healthy baby but that was the longest I felt comfortable waiting, not to mention she was a huge baby which sent them all flapping on and on about blood sugar levels which were completely fine.

That's very sad sleighgirl (about your three friends who've lost babies)... I have one friend from my antenatal class who was induced at 40+15 and had contractions for two days before she had a section as she'd only dilated 2cm in that time... they did the section at 40+17 but she didn't mention if there were any signs of placental failure. I've never asked.... but how scary!

I'm only one day past my due date, and I have a section booked for 31st if I don't go in to labour before then... we're so lucky these days.

All 9 of mine were overdue but the longest I was willing to wait was 40+14. I wouldn't risk it past that. 2 were induced.

Placenta failure isn't automatic after x weeks I guess that is part of the problem no one knows when a placenta will deteriorate or stop functioning. There are plenty of women out there who have waited to labour naturally at 42, 43 & even probably 44 weeks all without incidence.

It's common sense really, the longer your baby is inside you, the greater the risks of the baby dying inside you i.e. more babies die before 12 weeks than before 6 weeks.

However, there are risks, some quite dangerous' of inducing too early. Placenta deterioration is more likely at 36 weeks than 28, but no-one would do an induction then because the risks to the baby are more than the risks of a placenta deterioration, although it can still happen.

So, yes the longer the baby is inside you the greater the risk of placenta failure, but premature evacuation carries risks too, and to be honest, with daily, or every other day monitoring, the health of the placenta can be kept track of and you therefore greatly remove the risk of both that, and the risks associated with removing a baby that isn't yet properly cooked.

And, there are few studies on what happens after the due date, because doctors are so intervention-happy women are rarely 'allowed' to find out. I'd place a good deal of money on a bet that only a teeeny amount of women don't go into labour.

Well, from personal experience after 16 days I simply went into labour. I weighed up the risks involved with induction against the risk of stillbirth and decided induction was the greater risk for me.

I did wonder if she would ever appear. When she did she was very alert, could hold her head up and look around her, wasn't like a newborn at all.

Just been reading my Ina May Gaskin book...She says that, although the stillbirth rate does go up (from 2.5/1000 to 4.5/1000) if you do go (I think it's 2 weeks) overdue, the signs of the placenta deteriorating or the amniotic fluid decreasing are v. easy to spot if you are regularly monitored.....Hmmmm.

I'm still worried about what choice to make were I to go overdue though....Part of me thinks that my personal cutoff might be 14 days, but I don't know...I'm a bit scared of induction via drip; it sounds a bit horrid...

Mind you, Mother said she was induced and it was a fast labour and it was "all fine", with none of these new-fangled methods of pain relief, just gas and air....Doubtless we were both delivered onto coal sacks, and she was back at the mangle that afternoon too....

I went two weeks overdue, refused induction and did go into labour naturally at 40+14. I had been scanned that very morning to check placental function again and the consultant was (sort of) ok for me to stay pregnant another day or so, although the placenta was showing clear signs of calcification and he would much rather I'd have been induced days previously. My naive 'do it all naturally' attitude meant I'd been really bolshy with the hospital, refusing to be induced, when in all likelihood that's what would have been best.

In the end, I had a horrific, very long, back to back labour and DD was eventually dragged out by forceps after being very distressed and badly positioned. She was very unwell on arrival and only had an APGAR score of 1 (but quickly recovered). I don't know if she would have been better off being born earlier by induction, I guess I'll never know but if I was in the same situation again I wouldn't fight so hard against induction, just in case.

All of mine were overdue (had an induction with DS2 at 41+3 because they were concerned about the placenta, but did no tests to confirm that, it felt like a random comment to justify having me induced at a convenient time for them tbh) DD went the longest, she was born on a Tuesday morning at 41+4, but I had a tentative booking on the Friday (42wks) for an induction I didn't want. MWs warned me that if I didn't have the induction I would have to travel in for daily testing. Logistically, that would have been incredibly difficult, so I'm glad she came when she did!

With dc4 I saw the pro-leave it as long as you want consultant and even with my history of healthy babies being induced past 42 weeks she still said that she would prefer me to be induced near 42 weeks than 43 because feotal monitoring only tells you that the baby is fine at that moment in time and 24 hours is a long time until the next check.

For me I couldn't have my homebirth past 42 weeks so tbh it was easier to get my induction booked in, it only took a couple of pessaries to get me going - no ARM with dc2 & dc4 no drip with any of them.

Oxygen supply to the baby is the issue with placenta disintegration -- a lot can go wrong with a baby's brain and organs in 24 hours if oxygen supply is compromised. I hated the idea of being induced, being a do it yourself kind of gal, but having been induced 3 times, I have to say, firstly, that it went very differently each time, and second, that I brought home a healthy baby every time.

First used drip, labour and delivery took 8 hours start to finish, exactly as the doctor predicted actually it took 6 minutes longer; second induction got going with just the gel, and that took about 6 hours from insertion to delivery; third took two tries with the gel plus a drip, so about 24 hours altogether, but I had gestational diabetes with that pregnancy and the induction was on the due date maybe that accounted for the lack of responsiveness to the gel. The first two were at 40+7 (baby large, placenta low, overdue) and 40+8 (amniotic fluid almost all gone with this baby). I didn't use painkillers for any of them -- I needed a shot for nausea with the first and last inductions.

I felt at the time of my first induction that my doctor was intervention happy, medicine by calendar, and all that; baby turned out to be a behemoth though, bigger by a whole pound than the estimate, and goodness only knows how much bigger he would have got or how much intervention would have been needed if I had just not turned up for the induction. As it was, doctor used a vacuum extractor
Induction is only part of the procedure -- you're still the one giving birth, drip or no drip; all that's missing is your own hormones to start with, but after that it's all you and your efforts that bring forth the baby.

On ds I was 10 days early dd was booked for inducement when I went into labor 10 days late I was shown the placenta both times and ds placenta looked healthier dd placenta was more deteriorated and can only be described as skinless and not nice (not that a placenta is particularly nice anyway).

The result was the same healthy, happy alert babies.

I was induced at 40+17, DS1 was born 40+18, I was monitored daily for last 3 days and also had a scan day before induction. My placenta was completely healthy when they showed it me after he was born. He was 8.13lbs (4.0kg) and pooped on the way out so they kept us in overnight. He was also very alert and looking around.

I was using an independent midwife, and a sweep at 40+7 turned him posterior and he couldn't get down low enough to come naturally. Like others say, I won't wait a day past 40+14 now as I know how precious he is and would not want to jeopardise any other DCs.

I will also never let them sweep me on my back again. As I am 5.10" he slipped out of my pelvis and turned. Had they not have done this, I would have had him properly positioned and he would have put in an appearance around 40+7 I am absolutely sure.

Good luck!