Another Induction Question...

[Luckyelephant1]

FTM and struggling to understand inductions fully tbh. They get such a bad rep from all these positive birth type groups and also you hear horror stories about worse labours etc.

Mote- I FULLY understand when inductions are necessary ie risks of pre-eclampsia etc and I'm not questioning that...I don't want this to turn into an argument about inductions and risk like a recent thread on here.

What I'm wondering is, in a low risk pregnancy with no warning signs, where baby size and placenta and fluid etc are all normal... are inductions and to an extent sweeps routinely offered to those who have gone past their due date? Why have induction rates soared in recent times? Is simply going overdue a clinical justification for induction?

Note not mote lol.

I don't really know but I'm 40+1 and my midwife has said because I'm low risk I don't have to have anything I don't want to have. I think at a certain point it may become necessary but I think that's for our safety rather than the babies. Watching with interest though as I'm pretty clueless and also a FTM

I chose a sweep at 40+5 with my first as the pain of SPD made me think any type of labour would be preferable. Didn't really work as still took a few more days (and talk of induction) before he came. They don't like you going over around 40+10 in my area, even if you're in the lowest risk group. Every day after 2 weeks late is a higher risk of big issues.

Had to have an induction with second, as had PROMs - waters went but no labour and we were both at much higher risk of infection. It was much more painful than my first labour, but the entire circumstances were different as well - on back, not in water, a million people poking and prodding rather than leaving me to it. I genuinely believe it was the lesser ability to focus on labour that made it more stressful and painful, rather than the pessary.

I'm measuring big for our third, I have a feeling that induction will be brought up sooner rather than later. As much as I dislike the idea, from everything I've read and been told, it would be better to be induced and 'force' labour at 40 weeks, than risk the injury and difficulty of birthing what will almost certainly be a 9+ pound baby could possibly bring.

I was induced with both of mine as 10+ days overdue, both were over 9lb so glad I didn't wait and let them grow even bigger! A pessary got me started and for both was able to remove and contractions eased a little and I was still able to move about. Positive experience here although I don't have another birth to compare to.

I had an induction 3 weeks ago at 39+6 after what was a completely uneventful healthy pregnancy. I flagged for borderline protein in my urine at a midwife appointment and was offered an induction for the next day. Had a pessary inserted late afternoon, woke up at 5am to my waters breaking and baby arrived by 7. All very non stressful. I had associated induction with a long painful labour but this birth was far easier than my first- which was a much longer but natural labour at 40+6. Recovery has been very straightforward too.

Thanks, yeah I'd definitely consider PROM and protein in urine to be very valid reasons for one. Big babies I guess it's nice to be offered even if not 'essential'. Glad to hear some positive induction experiences though.

I was induced at 40+8 which was the standard protocol where I was. Baby was actually born at 40+10 with a lot of meconium so it was probably the right decision to induce although they didn't go about it the right way.

I've been induced 3 times (4 births)

In our area they offer sweeps at 40wks for FTM and 41 wks for subsequent pregnancies. Then induction is offered at 42wks. People could choose to be continually be monitored. They don't routinely offer them earlier for low risk, and this hasn't changed in 20yrs (for me anyway as I've been induced in 2000, 2011 and 2019)

By 42wks with DD1 and DD3 I had had enough so opted for induction. They were both large babies (dd3 was 9lb10) and frankly i don't know if i would ever have gone spontaneously with them.

DS (DC4) was induced at 40wks due to size. This was again offered and I chose to be induced on the basis my babies don't even fancy being born at 42wks so why not meet him 2wks sooner. He was also predicted to be over 5kg/11lb if left to his own devices which would have been over 99th centile and the risks associated with babies being over 5kg at birth are greater. I felt I'd likely be induced anyway, he was a mere 9lb5.

I'm expecting DC5 and at nearly 42 have been told they would prefer to induce at 41wks due to my age.

Overdue is 42wks plus. We kind of have this attitude that 40+1 Is late but full term is 37-42wks. So my experience has always been that unless there are other issues they don't routinely induce until either 40+10 or 42wks and even then it's a choice.

I've always taken the sweeps because I would prefer not to be induced but only Dd2 complied!!

But births 2 and 3 were very positive and as I say I expect I will be induced again this time.

That's not to say I wouldn't love to go spontaneously but the risks associated with my age etc and frankly having PGP and being the size of a house, mean I wouldn't opt for monitoring myself 😂

All 3 of mine have been inductions ...

DS1 just because I was 42 weeks and I was grateful as baby didn’t seem to want to leave ever. It was such a positive experience for me.

DS2 I had real issues with movement not helped by anterior placenta but I knew something else wasn’t right. I bleed all through so they said they would induced me at due date latest but then after an episode of bleeding again I had a scan which showed Ds hadn’t grown since my last grown scans 3 weeks before so induced almost straight away as it appeared that my placenta was failing and there were issues with cord blood flow. Again super positive experience and I’m just glad he’s here safe (also I was strepB again but unlike DS1 I knew so induction made me feel much safer because I knew I’d get my antibiotics and he wouldnt get sick like DS1 did)

Dd I had the worst sciatica and I begged my consultant to sign off inducing me at due date but she said that wasn’t a good enough reason for induction. Didn’t matter tho because a scan after reduced movements showed my placenta failed again / barely any fluid around baby / cord issues at 38 weeks (same as DS2) so induced again ASAP. Again super positive and as I was strepB again at birth (I had a swab during labour but my consultant was treating me as strepB regardless as I’d had it twice in birth and one Ill baby and she knew I was worried) I got my antibiotics.

In my experience they don’t just induce for the sake of it. Ds I asked a few times and was told that there was no reason until I was 42 weeks and with DD I spoke to my consultant a few times about it ... but again they made it clear induction wasn’t considered unless necessary and Even if you do get one booked for a less urgent reason you’ll be likely to be bumped down the list or kept waiting on the ward if more urgent cases came in

I went over with my second. I think I was booked for a sweep at 40+5.... but she came at 40+2.

I didn't want to be induced but at the same time I was sooooooo over being pregnant

There is a very small, but statistically significant uplift in stillborn rates once you go beyond 40 weeks, especially as your age increases. No hospital wants to risk any still births which is why they will often try to induce women beyond a certain point.