Has anyone had an epidural 2nd time around but not 1st time?

[buckyou]

I had my daughter 16 months ago and i was quite determined that I wanted to do it with just gas and air. Which i managed but really found it very painful!!! Some of my friends have found it 'not that bad', but i really did find it quite bad right from the start.

I kind of feel a bit of a wimp but not sure if u want to put myself through all the pain again if i can have an injection to stop it!?

I'm not sure.. do i just need to stop being a wuss?? Does it hurt less 2nd time?

I think every labour is different. My first was 25 hours of active labour and I couldn't have done it without the epidural. My second was 3.5 hours and I did it on gas and air - it hurt a LOT, but because it was so quick, I could handle it. It all depends on how it goes on the day. It's hard not to beat yourself up about it, but please try. As long as you and baby are healthy at the end of it, that's what matters.

I had an epidural with DD, but I'd already been in labour for 42 hours by the time I opted for one.

I was having 90 second long full-on contractions with a 2 minute interval and after 5 hours of that I was still only fingertip dilated. They decided to induce and recommended that I had an epidural first as I was so exhausted.

Yes I ended up with ventouse and ultimately forceps, but that was due to my wonky shaped pelvis and DD ending up totally jammed with her head sideways, not because of the epidural.

I had a mobile epidural so I could still move around, feel everything I need to etc, I just wasn't in pain and could get a bit of rest. Also meant when I was final rushed to theatre everything was a lot easier as the epidural was already in place.

If DD hadn't been malpositioned and everything had progressed normally I could have probably been fine on gas and air, but I was pretty miserable by the time they started the induction and I was incredibly grateful to have the option.

There are no medals for not having pain relief - happy healthy mummy and happy healthy baby is the aim however you get there.

Epidurals are linked to a longer pushing stage and an increased risk of instrumental deliveries (forceps, ventouse). They aren't linked to a longer first stage of labour or increased risk of CS. (Info from NICE guidelines). If you have an epidural, you and your baby have to be monitored much more closely since your blood pressure can drop due to the epidural drugs, and you will definitely need a cannula for IV access.

From personal experience, I found pushing without an epidural much easier and 1.5 hours faster! From experience caring with women in labour, especially first time mums, pushing is much easier and more effective when the woman can feel what's happening. Obviously it has to be your choice, but I think women need to know the facts in advance to be able to make an informed choice, and weigh up the risks and benefits.

That should be caring for, not with!

I had a 23 hour labour with my first with minimal pain relief and an 8 hour labour with An epidural with my 2nd.
Much preferred the 2nd option!!!

women have had epiduralsbecauseof long labours, poor presentations etc, which all independently increase the risk of assisted delivery etc regardless of the epidural or not.

^^I strongly agree with this. My labour was long anyway. I got to the stage where I couldn't even speak because of the pain caused by continous strong contractions at only 4cm dilated when I agreed to the offered epidural. Only 5 minutes before the midwife had commented how well I was doing with no pain relief. It just goes to show how quickly the situation can change and how differently our bodies react. Had I continued without the epidural I very much doubt I would have been able to push ds out as I wouldn't have been in a fit state by the time it came to deliver him. I also doubt the fact that I needed intervention because of his big head was caused by the epidural. What the epidural did mean was I could enjoy his entrance into the world when it did happen.

I think you should make the best decision for you at the time and not compare yourself to anyone else. We're all different.

Just ask for one, OP

Not a big deal

There is no honour in pain, imo

I had one with the first, my second was too quick

FWIW second births are usually quicker, and easier. No guarantee of course, but it's often the case.

I had an epidural both times. First because I was induced and had pre-eclampsia so it was recommended to lower my blood pressure. The second time I took it as soon as I was offered (5cms) as I had done about 25 hours already. DS2 was over 10lbs, back to back.

Although even if he hadn't been huge, I still would have taken the epidural as I'd planned for it. I knew I wouldn't be able to take the pain and there's no shame at all in admitting that.

DC 1- established labour was 11 hours, epidural was amazing as I was so tired and in a lot of pain.
DC 2- established labour was 3 hours 8 minutes, the pain was unbearable, but no time for epidural.

I'd say just wait and see what happens on the day.

I was in pain during my first labour, but it was more of a pressure sort of pain and I couldn't sit or lie down. I had some pethedine, which totally knocked me out. During the pushing stage, I just had gas and air.

My second birth was (accidentally!) totally drug free. But again, the pain was more during the first stage than second stage. The crowning was a different sort of pain which I personally felt much more able to cope with. I did a lot of leaning on/over things rather than trying to sit or lie down.

I was very very against having an epidural with my first, but I hated the pethedine so much that for number 2, I would have skipped pethedine and gone straight for an epidural if it had been much more painful. But someone mentioned above that pethedine worked great for them.

IMO, every woman is different but also every labour and every baby. If either of my babies had been in a different position, it may have been more painful for me and I would have considered an epidural.

Oooh, what a question what a debate. Everyone is different, every birth is different, I had 4, first was an emergency cesarean, was booked, but while in Hospital on bed rest waters broke. She was left lateral breach, at first they thought it was twins, bum was a second head. Was told not to get pregnant for 4 years, that was fine wasnt planning going thru that again. Pregnant with son, told I would always have to have cesareans because of the scar, managed to find consultant, who would let me have trial of labour, month bedrest for high BP and early labour, second son, not so bad, second daughter (I was 41) no high BP no hospitalisation, no problems, my shortest labour but it was still 8 hours, bit of gas and air, incidentally THIS daughter is a genuine size 0, had 2 kids 16 months apart second one 7 and half lb, no stitches, tears, short labours but intense.So everyone is different, I think at least you have some idea what to expect, and you can take it from there.

You always see women saying in those threads that they could hande it, they could cope.

My second, as said, was 3.5 hours and perfectly positioned, so I'm pretty sure I could have coped. I mean the pain would not have killed me or anything. I just didn't want to cope. Just like I know I can cope with dentist visits without pain relief, I just don't want to.

I find it sad that women feel like they have to manage and do it all naturally - of course it's fine if that's what you want (my mum also genuinely prefers not to have pain relief at dentists) but honestly you won't get a medal.

Thanks for all the comments ladies.

I'm wondering if i will perhaps not have time anyway, my first labour was quite quick.

I think i'll go in with more of an open mind this time.

I didn't have one the first time, very fast labour, arrived at the hospital and she was born 20 minutes later. Waters broke in the car on the way.
No gas and air as in France and had as episiotomy... ouch!

Wanted to keep it as 'natural' as possible for the second, thought as i'd done it once, i'd be able to do it again.

Baby 2 had different ideas, lost my waters but nothing else happened. Was in hospital for 24 hours hooked up to drips of antibiotics etc. Drs decided to induce me the next day, it came on so quickly and was so painful. I was stuck to the bed tubed up so I went for the epidural. I still felt everything and felt totally in control. She was born 1hr after I was induced and the recovery was fine.

Just keep an open mind and roll with the punches.

"Epidurals are certainly associated with longer labours and more difficult deliveries, but it isn't clear if they actually cause those issues."

Yes, it's hard to unpick.

Never the less, choosing to labour in an environment where epidurals are immediately available (ie, labour ward) does seem to result in much higher likelihood of complications in birth, even if you're a low risk, healthy woman.

OP you want to think about what your priorities are. If you can't be at peace with the thought of labouring without an epidural, you need to go to the labour ward and then work out how you feel when you get there.

If your primary wish is to increase the likelihood of having a straightforward birth, then you might want to put yourself in an environment where epidurals aren't immediately available (ie, home or birth centre).

Is that possible for you OP? Are you low risk?

Have you had a chance to debrief your first birth with a midwife? That might help!

I also think it's important to realise that when it comes to the need for pain relief the things which really make a difference as to whether you can cope are usually about how much mobility you have, whether you're induced or not, how good your midwife is, and the position of the baby, over and above anything which is intrinsically to do with your pain thresh hold. Also whether or not you have access to a pool. The only way to max your chance of using one is having a homebirth.