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

Pregnancy

Talk about every stage of pregnancy, from early symptoms to preparing for birth.

Flip

Original poster

Back-to-back birth with first - more likely with second???

16 replies

Lozario · 07/09/2010 16:36

Hello all,

I had my first baby 15 months ago, he was back to back and the birth was absolutely horrific!! The midwife told me this is generally a more painful and drawn-out delivery, and indeed the whole thing took a couple of days and resulted in one stressed out, blue baby. (He's fine now!!! :))

So I'm now 12 weeks preggo with my second, and I'm wondering, those of you who've had your first back to back, were your subsequent deliveries the same? DS1's back was always settled on one side of my tummy rather than the front of my tummy, so I'm wondering if it's my pelvic shape or something. I'm bloody terrified this time, much more than I was with first.

Thanks :)

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

elliepac · 07/09/2010 16:38

ALthough I have absolutely no medical statistics or qualifications.....DS was back to back and consequently a horrific and drawn out labour as you described above. DD was not back to back and a relatively easy and short labour of 2 1/2 hours.

HTH.

dublinmom · 07/09/2010 16:49

I am the same as elliepac-- DS was back to back, both DD1 and DD2 were fine (and quick)!. So don't worry too much!

Original poster

Lozario · 07/09/2010 17:58

Thanks elliepac and dublinmom, that's so reassuring. Did you do anything to encourage a "normal way" birth the following times? My midwife said something about certain pregnancy yoga positions were good to encourage a better position, lots of leaning forward or something?

I sort of feel I'll need counselling towards the end of the pregnancy in order to gear up for it!!!

OP posts:

tegan · 07/09/2010 18:10

I had a back to back with dd1 but dd2 and ds weren't and slid out without any assistance.

Please don't stress about it

elliepac · 07/09/2010 18:13

I did absolutely nothing to encourage a better position. No yoga, no nothing.

Original poster

Lozario · 07/09/2010 21:25

Great thanks guys :)

OP posts:

YouMightKnowMe · 07/09/2010 21:29

no I don't think it impacts second deliveries.

Back to back is more likely ith an anterior placenta as baby likes to face placenta but there is no hard and fast rule

beccas · 07/09/2010 21:29

DD back to back ghastly experience.
DS now 12 weeks decided to be breech from 20 weeks and stayed that way! Had section! i did read that OP is more common these days as we sit on our arses on the sofa more and in an chair at work all day. So get on all fours, bounce on ball and yoga.
Also read that an OP delivery (where they come out sunny side up) (my DD did) has a higher likeliness of subsequent babies being either breech or OP again, but if your baby turned for delivery, this has no subsequent effect.
I too had all the horror thoughts you are curretly feeling!
Don't worry, at least you will recognise back to back in labour and HOLLER for the anaesthetist!!!

thisisyesterday · 07/09/2010 21:34

my middle one was back to back. subsequent baby fine! in fact, he shot out in just over 45 minutes

NothingButTheTeuch · 07/09/2010 21:39

Both of mine have been back to back, probably due to the shape of my uterus (heart-shaped). DS1 was breech until day before he was born, and DS2 was head down nice and early.

Both births very quick although extremely painful. DS2 turned during birth but DS1 was 'stargazing' born face up!

Google Optimum Foetal Positioning for some tips, but bear in mind that (research shows) that getting onto all fours, etc works best in early labour. Having said that, I don't think it hurts to do it during pregnancy as I found it took the pressure off my pelvic floor and pelvis and felt nice

All the best.

LooL00 · 08/09/2010 09:27

Same as dublinmum. DC1 took 36+ hours, the other 2 were less than 6 hours. Don't worry about it, I was shocked how easy it was to give birth to dc2.

Original poster

Lozario · 08/09/2010 12:05

I especially like the "quick second birth" idea - especially as I was kindly informed after my first that most of my 40 hours had been "pre-labour" and not actual labour at all. Cha, not from where I was lying!!!

OP posts:

LooL00 · 08/09/2010 12:18

loz I only got to the hosp 15 mins before dc2 as born as I thought I was just having BHicks. If the baby is not back to back the pain actually stops between contractions!!!

Original poster

Lozario · 08/09/2010 12:51

Loo - that is actually AMAZING to hear - by 4cm dilated (after 28 hours!!) the pain was already constant and just insane with the contractions, I was blacking out with them as there was no respite. I'm not great with pain so I just put it down to my low pain threshold. Maybe I'm not as much of a wuss as I thought!

OP posts:

wigglesrock · 08/09/2010 12:58

My dd1 was "back to back", long labour well not that long about 18 hours in all but very very painful, all well but, dd2 was born in 2.5 hours!! Dh almost missed the vital moment!!

exexpat · 08/09/2010 13:08

Both mine were back to back; first labour fairly drawn out and difficult, second much easier despite being back to back - about 8 hours, no intervention, no pain relief. So even if your second one ends up back-to-back, don't worry - second time round may well be a lot easier anyway. And remember the advantage of having back-to-back bumps is that you don't get kicked in the guts or bladder or whatever as much as everyone else .

Flip