% of Breech Babies?

[MegBoz]

I was curious & Googled & found that, "About 3% of babies are breech at the end of pregnancy."

In my own personal experience, it seems more like 20-30%!! Anyone else know a lot more Mamas who had breech babies? (Of course, everyone I know had CS for it.)

[snowmom5]

Back when my first child was breech, the figure I read was around 4%, close enough (yeah, I had a section). I know very few people in real life - only one other person I can think of - whose baby was breech.

My DH's cousin was also breech herself, and reminded me that sometimes breech is associated with something not being normal (I can't remember her exact words because that was a long time ago; she's a doc in a subspecialty in peds so she was worried about dd; dd was nearly IUGR due to an undiagnosed clotting issue, so I often wondered if that played a role; she was also hypotonic with developmental delays and other weird little things, etc.). We had a failed external version with dd - she would not budge one iota - so there was some kind of reason, even though we'll never know what it was.

[JamieCatheryn]

Many babies are breech near the end of pregnancy, and a cesarean gets scheduled with the assumption they won't turn. Maybe the 3% or 4% statistic is based only on pregnancies where labor was allowed to begin spontaneously?

[Robinna]

Yeah the statistic is 3-4% but keep in mind, that IS a lot of babies. Another way to look at the stat is that's 1 in 30 mamas in the UK (according to Benna Waites) and it also means that in my city alone, there's at least one breech baby born every single day. 3-4% is way more babies than it sounds like.

I don't know if that stat is based on "how many babies are still breech before their elective c/s at 38 wks" or if it's actually how many babies would still be breech if mamas chose to not schedule. That stat does predate the Term Breech Trial (2000), so maybe it does reflect a higher incidence of spontaneous breech labours than we have now, I don't know.

I know a lot of breech mamas, myself, but then, they sort of flock to me (go figure). Breeches also tend to run in families, and those of us who have breeches are at "higher risk" of having another (that term drives me crazy, as if there's something wrong with my baby for being breech - c'mon people, it's JUST a BABY, not a risk!!! ).

[milosmomma]

Originally Posted by JamieCatheryn

Many babies are breech near the end of pregnancy, and a cesarean gets scheduled with the assumption they won't turn. Maybe the 3% or 4% statistic is based only on pregnancies where labor was allowed to begin spontaneously?

That's what I was thinking. DS flipped from breech at 38w 4 days. If I hadn't pushed to wait, they would have scheduled my C/S at my 38 week appointment for the following day.

[AutumnAir]

Well the only two mamas I know who've given birth in the last couple of months both had breech babies (and both were sectioned for them at 38 weeks).

It really bugs me. From my understanding of it, these are some facts about breech babies.

- Many babies are breech earlier in pregnancy, which is why preemies are more often born breech. Not that there's anything wrong with 'being breech' but simply that they have more room to move when they're smaller so there's a greater likelihood of them being head up
-There is a small correlation between breech and other problems, but those problems would still exist whether or not the baby was breech (same as with post-dates - lots of post-dates babies are fine, some have problems but they would have problems if kicked out at 38 weeks too, KWIM?)
-Being breech in and of itself does not CAUSE problems for the baby in utero
-There is a genetic tendency towards breech, possibly connected to uterine shape, making it simply more comfortable for a baby to be breech
- The study which concluded that c-section was safer than vaginal breech birth neglected to account for iatrogenic harm. Almost all of the problems encountered in vaginal breech births are the result of iatrogenic harm - doctors who are inexperienced with this kind of birth, who panic and start tugging and pulling on the baby to get it out, causing all sorts of horrible injuries to both mom and babe. Breech births (even more so than 'normal' births) *need* patience and gentleness.

[Meg08]

I think this forum may attract a disproportional number of breech pregnancies as women who wouldn't normally go to a forum may when a problem arises with their pregnancy, and since most OBs tend to treat breech as an automatic section, this would be a great place to get advice on avoiding that.

Also, I see a lot of women refer to their pregnancies as breech even though they are no where near the 35 week mark. It is my understanding that a pregnancy isn't considered breech until 35 weeks (or something very close to that ... 34 or 36).

I do, however, wonder how much the numbers have changed since they started encouraging sections at 38 weeks instead of letting labour happen spontaneously. I also wonder if premies are included in the stat of 3-4%, as they are more likely to be of a breech presentation. But I think it just includes term pregnancies (and is that 36 or 37 weeks?).

But there does seem to be a lot of breech babies on here!

[hapersmion]

The statistic I've heard is that 3% of babies are breech at term, and 5% of babies born in the US today are breech. That's 1 in 20, pretty common. Add that to the factors other people have mentioned, and you're looking at a lot of breech mamas around here! We ought to restart the breechy baby tribe on FYT.

Now, in my family for the past few generations, breech babies have been 1 in 3.

[Robinna]

So HERE is a nifty little tidbit. I met yesterday with teh SOGC and the Exec VP personally recommends taht women NOT schedule c/s for breech... because by 41 wks only about 1-2% of babies are still breech. He believes it a fable that breech babies "come early", and that by waiting for labour nearly all babies will turn. Old school OB now in admin with the SOGC.

BTW, the new SOGC guidelines on breech say nearly exactly what we'd want them to. I didn't get teh precise wording, jsut his briefing on it. But Andrew Kotaska is one of the 3 OBS writing the guidelins which can ONLY be a good thing. WHOO HOO!

[AutumnAir]

Hurray! Great news! Let's hope the wisdom crosses the Atlantic quickly!

[jenholle]

Robin: Wow- that is a great fact to know! My LO is breech now and I'm 38w3d. I'm holding out hope that baby turns...I do have a c-section scheduled for 39w5d which is the latest I've gone with either of my pregnancies so I'm hoping labor starts before then and maybe baby will turn...

Wish me luck!!!

[rixafreeze]

Robinna--great to hear that, especially that Kotaska is helping write policy! I am so excited for the Breech Birth Conference too.

[Novella]

Originally Posted by Robinna

So HERE is a nifty little tidbit. I met yesterday with teh SOGC and the Exec VP personally recommends taht women NOT schedule c/s for breech... because by 41 wks only about 1-2% of babies are still breech. He believes it a fable that breech babies "come early", and that by waiting for labour nearly all babies will turn. Old school OB now in admin with the SOGC.

That's incredible. I've read some pretty ridiculous, self-protectionist crap from the SOGC in the past. This is amazing. Thank you so much for posting that information.

[crystal741]

Great info here . My baby is breech I am 38.4 wks. He was head down until the 37 th week! What luck! I believe it has to do with the alignment of my pelvis since I was in physical therapy for pain associated with SPD (Symphysis Pubis Dysfunction) and the therapist told me at my first appt my pelvis and hips were misaligned. Unfortunately my Ins doesnt cover a chiro, and I have the feeling that if I had seen one and paid out of pocket I may not be in this predicament. I have an appt tomorrow with a chiro to try the webster technique. I am hopeful. I have been ruled out as a candidate for a version due to placenta and babys large size which is frustrating! I am wondering if anyone knows what would happen if I went into labor and refused a c section...would they kick me out?

[MegBoz]

Originally Posted by crystal741

I am wondering if anyone knows what would happen if I went into labor and refused a c section...would they kick me out?

This has come up before. As already posted here, breech vaginal birth really requires patience & gentleness. Many Mamas have posted that having an OB forced to attend a breech birth who is scared (because they don't know what they're doing) and possibly angry at being forced to do something against their will might not be the best or safest scenario.

Technically, legally they can't force the CS, but more than one Mama has been prepped & rolled into surgery saying, "no, no, I don't want a CS."

[Juliacat]

My dd was breech, I had her vaginally, and I am worried that this baby might be breech too, although my midwife keeps quoting the 3% figure at me. I think 3% is probably about right. It's nice to know that SOME babies flip (mine would have none of that).