Induction

2»

Replies

  • cocolo89
    cocolo89 Posts: 1,169 Member
    I was induced with DD and it was intense but after I got to epi, it was like heaven. LOL. I wouldn't be afraid to do it again. I had a good experience. I was induced at 2pm, they broke my water around 430-5 and I was fully dilated at 10pm. Buuuut I got my epi late (7.5cm dilated) soo I couldn't feel the need to push and I didn't know if I was doing it right. LOL. once I started feeling the contractions a little better, she came out. I pushed for 3hr15mins. Yikes I think that was the worst part. I was so tired. lol

    How many weeks were you when they induced?

    I was exactly 40wks :)
  • cocolo89
    cocolo89 Posts: 1,169 Member
    I just got a phone call from my doctor's office, I'm 40 weeks and 4 days, and they have me scheduled to come in on Thursday morning to get gel on my cervix, then Friday at 5am to start the pitocin if the gel doesn't kick start me into labor.

    I AM SO NERVOUS!

    Good luck!! will be thinking about you!! Get lots of rest!
  • lilchino4af
    lilchino4af Posts: 1,292 Member
    I went to 43 1/2 weeks with my second - she was beautiful, perfect, and 8 lbs 1 oz - it felt like I was pregnant foreeeeeever, but I was glad the docs/midwife didn't "force things", and just let her do what she needed to do. I had NST monitoring twice a week, then every other day until she came, but she was doing great and so was I, and it all worked out just fine. Now of course my docs say "WHAT doctor let you do THAT?!?" but I wouldn't go back and change it for the world. :smile:
    I'm going to be adamant about this too! I don't understand why so many drs go for inducing/scheduling c-sections if the baby doesn't come on his/her own at 40 wks, when that's not technicially our due dates. if you stop to think about it, the due date they give us is based on the first day of your last period, not your conception date which is generally 2 weeks later. So if 40 weeks is the common gestational period for babies, then instead of 40 weeks from LMP, it should be 42, to account for those extra 2 weeks that mean nothing. So really, drs should be looking to do something come that later time. So in your case, you were really only 1.5 wks late, not 3.5 wks.

    Ya'll may not agree, but that's how I understand/see it, and my stance going into my first pregnancy, God and cicumstances willing, is to go natural w/no meds, no interventions, no scheduling, nothing (though I'll be flexible to changing if need arises). Unfortunately it will have to be in the hospital because being military I don't have a choice, but I plan to labor for as long as I can in the comfort of my own home w/my husband and a doula before having to relocate to the hospital to minimize any potential neg confrontations w/the drs since I won't actually see an OB until the day I'm in labor.
  • FaugHorn
    FaugHorn Posts: 1,060 Member
    According to internetz (which could NEVER be wrong :wink:)The gestation period of a human, from time of conception to birth is approximately 9 months (266 days/38 Weeks). 9.5 months is calculated from the first day of the last menstrual period (280 days/40 Weeks).

    Most full-term babies will come between 37-42 weeks

    A pregnancy is considered to be "full-term" between 37 and 42 weeks. 40 weeks is still considered the standard length of a pregnancy and "due dates" are based on that number. However, newer studies have indictaed that the true AVERAGE gestation for a healthy pregnancy with spontaneous in a nulliparous (first-time) mother is approximately 41 weeks and 3 days, with multiparous (with previous children) mother giving birth spontaneously, on average, at 41 weeks and 1 day. But in America in particular, most labors are induced before reaching that gestation without medical cause, so they never reach the natural gestational "average".

    Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_long_is_the_gestation_period_for_a_human#ixzz26HfNy65Y
  • chickybuns
    chickybuns Posts: 1,037 Member
    According to internetz (which could NEVER be wrong :wink:)The gestation period of a human, from time of conception to birth is approximately 9 months (266 days/38 Weeks). 9.5 months is calculated from the first day of the last menstrual period (280 days/40 Weeks).

    Most full-term babies will come between 37-42 weeks

    A pregnancy is considered to be "full-term" between 37 and 42 weeks. 40 weeks is still considered the standard length of a pregnancy and "due dates" are based on that number. However, newer studies have indictaed that the true AVERAGE gestation for a healthy pregnancy with spontaneous in a nulliparous (first-time) mother is approximately 41 weeks and 3 days, with multiparous (with previous children) mother giving birth spontaneously, on average, at 41 weeks and 1 day. But in America in particular, most labors are induced before reaching that gestation without medical cause, so they never reach the natural gestational "average".

    Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_long_is_the_gestation_period_for_a_human#ixzz26HfNy65Y

    Good info, I've read a few studies that say the average term is around 41 too, I just don't know why doctors are in such a hurry, for the most part...babies know when they're ready :)
  • I had to be induced because I had Preclampsia during my first pregnancy. I had stroke level blood pressure while on bed rest, and they induced me 2 weeks before my due date. It was a LONG process. They started the Potocin at 2:30pm on Wed, Nov 19th and I finally had William via C-Section at 9:02pm on Fri, Nov 21st. I had the epideral, so the pain wasn't too bad. I definately still felt the contractions, but I had other issues that came along with my labor. Because of my blood pressure, I had to lay only on my side, switching sides every 30 minutes. I had to have oxygen for most of the last half of labor because he wasn't getting enough. My water didn't break, so they had to break in early on Friday morning. I didn't dilate until around 4pm on Friday. I went through an hour of pushing before they decided that he wasn't going to come out that way and we would have to have a C-Section instead. It was a long, hard labor.

    This time around I will be able to pick my delivery date since it will be a scheduled C-Section. I can choose anywhere from 38-42 weeks. I plan on making it my due date or later. I wouldn't want to make the baby come out until it is ready unless I have a medical need to. There is a reason labor happens naturally.
  • RBXChas
    RBXChas Posts: 2,708 Member
    I am due 2 days after christmas and wonder if this will happen with me too with doctors wanting to take time off for christmas.... Although honestly i need to have the baby before the 1st of the year. My insurance deductible will restart and i know it sounds horrible but i just cannot afford another 3000 to pay

    Don't forget that tax write-off (at least here in the US)! Your child can be born on December 31st, and they count as a dependent tax deduction for that entire calendar year :smile: I have a friend whose daughter was born on 12/31, and he and I joked about that. My son was born in January, but it was late January, so a December delivery would have meant that he'd be pretty early, which I did not want, tax deduction be damned!
  • I am due 2 days after christmas and wonder if this will happen with me too with doctors wanting to take time off for christmas.... Although honestly i need to have the baby before the 1st of the year. My insurance deductible will restart and i know it sounds horrible but i just cannot afford another 3000 to pay

    Don't forget that tax write-off (at least here in the US)! Your child can be born on December 31st, and they count as a dependent tax deduction for that entire calendar year :smile: I have a friend whose daughter was born on 12/31, and he and I joked about that. My son was born in January, but it was late January, so a December delivery would have meant that he'd be pretty early, which I did not want, tax deduction be damned!

    You sound like an Accountant! I am one, and that is something I always stress to anyone saying they want a baby 1/1. Nope, go for 12/31 and get the deduction!! :)
  • RBXChas
    RBXChas Posts: 2,708 Member
    To reply to the OP, I would simply ask not to be induced. You have a right to say no. I know a lot of people who were induced, including my sister with her second child, and they did not have horror stories. However, if I were you, I would tell them that you want to let your body do what it will do. It shouldn't be a given that you will work around the doctors' holiday schedules. I say this as someone with three doctors in my family (my dad, my brother, and my husband's brother), and I know they work their butts off, sometimes at weird hours. But you shouldn't go into obstetrics if you don't want to risk being called into the hospital when it's inconvenient for you. Pick another field.
  • RBXChas
    RBXChas Posts: 2,708 Member
    I am due 2 days after christmas and wonder if this will happen with me too with doctors wanting to take time off for christmas.... Although honestly i need to have the baby before the 1st of the year. My insurance deductible will restart and i know it sounds horrible but i just cannot afford another 3000 to pay

    Don't forget that tax write-off (at least here in the US)! Your child can be born on December 31st, and they count as a dependent tax deduction for that entire calendar year :smile: I have a friend whose daughter was born on 12/31, and he and I joked about that. My son was born in January, but it was late January, so a December delivery would have meant that he'd be pretty early, which I did not want, tax deduction be damned!

    You sound like an Accountant! I am one, and that is something I always stress to anyone saying they want a baby 1/1. Nope, go for 12/31 and get the deduction!! :)

    Close, I'm a lawyer (I'm not a jerk, though, I promise, and I don't make tons of money)! But it's that same practical thinking :wink: However I'd rather have a healthy baby on 1/1 than get the tax deduction!
  • TheLaser
    TheLaser Posts: 338 Member
    I've been reading the book _Pushed_, which is admittedly a bit dated, but I think it gives an accurate picture of what happens at an induction, why inductions are done, and why they tend to lead to extremely painful labors and, often, C-sections following the painful labor. Of course, many people have good stories to tell about successful inductions, but I recommend just glancing at the book's section on induction. The book also discusses the problem of the "due date" and (mis-)calculating the date.

    I asked at one of the maternity ward tours what the policy is if you go past 42 weeks. It's your choice ultimately, but they really hate when you do that because it's an insurance liability for the doctors --not because it's necessarily wrong for you & the baby. To insurance companies, we are just statistics, not individuals. I got the sense that they put A LOT of pressure on post-42 wk mothers with scary facts, which may or may not be true (e.g. warnings of a huge -macrosomic- baby too big to get out, not enough amniotic fluid so baby suffers, etc). It turns out that ultrasounds have a pretty large margin of accuracy for such measurements, so those things are not always as clear cut as the doctors make them out to be.
  • RBXChas
    RBXChas Posts: 2,708 Member
    It turns out that ultrasounds have a pretty large margin of accuracy for such measurements, so those things are not always as clear cut as the doctors make them out to be.

    Not only this, but doctors tend to estimate size based on how you are measuring if you're not having regular ultrasounds (I did not). With my last pregnancy, I measured "perfectly" every month/week (in other words, right on schedule), and while I was in labor and in my blackout period (non-drug-induced - it's a long story), one of my OB's partners came in to check on me. I had never met her before but have heard from other people who go to that practice that she's kind of a beotch. Anyway, apparently she had said to me that she could tell just by looking at me that I was going to have "one huge baby," I guess because I was 255lbs.

    My son was 7lbs. 3oz. In other words, hardly huge. I only heard about the comment because when my son's weight was announced, my OB looked at me and said, "Oh, Dr. [Beotch] was wrong, he isn't huge. I didn't think you were going to have a big baby." Which of course led me to ask my husband what the hell she was talking about.

    It's generally the longer they "bake," the bigger they tend to be, but unless there is real concern over the health of either the baby or the mother (like preeclampsia), then I think you should be able to carry until you give birth on your own. Just because you may be 42 weeks by the doctor's estimate doesn't mean you're really not 40.

    Now the ability to plan your birth, time-wise? Having seen inductions with my sister and my SIL, I have to admit that I was a bit jealous that they knew exactly when they were going into the hospital, which helped for their jobs and for setting up care for their other kids. But frankly convenience would not be my top priority.
This discussion has been closed.