So at what point would you "give up"? - Page 2

[gossamerwindweb]

Actually, a heart defect would have developed LONG before the end of pregnancy. Normally in the first or early second trimester. I am sure you should stay away from the cohoshes until the very end of pregnancy, but I am not against them at the end if they are necessary for some reason. And I certainly think they are safer than pitocin.

Do whatever your heart is telling you! I think that is what all of us should do. Whether that is hospital induction, some kind of backup, herbal induction, or just waiting. You are the mom and you instinctively "know" I believe!

[flapjack]

Originally Posted by U-Turn

I don't feel like my goal is an ideal birth experience...it is a matter of weighing the risks. Is it riskier to wait for my body or to induce? Given, especially, that my dates could be off, and given what happened last time I induced through breaking my water, I'm inclined to believe the risk is greater in inducing at this point. If I start to feel otherwise, like if babe is slowing down, obviously, the risks would shift wildly to the other side. I'd always rather a c-section than an unhealthy (or worse) baby. But at this point, I'm not feeling like those are my options.

This is a fourth baby? How were #1 and #2 born?

In your shoes I'd go back to the back-up doc again, tell them that you're trying to decide whether to induce or not and ask for a BPP and monitoring. I personally feel better with closer vigilance after 42 weeks.
If you want to use the cohoshes, cimicifuga and caulophyllum are the homeopathic forms. I've got contractions out of them, but no baby: but then, my body works the other way round to yours. If baby isn't lined up right, I get contractions but no dilation at all.

[U-Turn]

Originally Posted by flapjack

This is a fourth baby? How were #1 and #2 born?

#1 was 10 years ago...My water started leaking a week early and, not knowing any better, I ran into the hospital and they induced. I had been 0cm, 0% effaced...obviously baby was not ready to come! Vaginal, though.

#2 was 8 years ago...They did an ultrasound at 38 weeks and decided she was too big. Induced. She was 9 lb, 6 oz, yes, but I wish I would've waited. They had me scared, though. Wish I knew there was an option of saying no to the doctors!

I've learned a whole lot since then!!!

[Youngfrankenstein]

Originally Posted by U-Turn

#1 was 10 years ago...My water started leaking a week early and, not knowing any better, I ran into the hospital and they induced. I had been 0cm, 0% effaced...obviously baby was not ready to come! Vaginal, though.

#2 was 8 years ago...They did an ultrasound at 38 weeks and decided she was too big. Induced. She was 9 lb, 6 oz, yes, but I wish I would've waited. They had me scared, though. Wish I knew there was an option of saying no to the doctors!

I've learned a whole lot since then!!!

I am crashing here to say that my first two, 10 and 8 years ago were EXACTLY the same way.

#1-water started leaking, got "threats" from the medical practice and ended up with induction

#2-I had polyhydramenos, extra fluid, and was told my uterus was so stretched I'd never go into labor on my own so I was induced from "nothing". He was 9# 14oz!

[GinnyMama]

This is my first UC, and my first was born at 37 weeks, so I have no idea what I'm talking about here from a personal standpoint. Lol! Just a disclaimer.

But, being a vbac myself... I don't think I'd ever "give up" and allow them to do an induction. No cervadil or pitocin for me, thanks very much! Now herbal things, on the other hand, I might do... Or bust out that pump!

ESPECIALLY because your dates could be off by a bit. You may not even be at 42 weeks yet. But as the others have said, I think the very most important thing is listening to your intuition, although I know it's sorta hard to differentiate between inner voice and fear/frustration. Good luck mama! KUP!

[fwlady]

Nursing during PG can make you go "overdue"

Okay, I haven't read all the pages, but I wanted to give you some encouragement. My first VBAC, we were totally against induction, although at the time, we only knew about the medicated type. They did all the non stress tests, baby was fine. We also had a FP, and the drs tried to give me all the dead baby scary cr*p. The baby was fine. I had nursed my oldest until I was 6 mos along, and comes to find out, from my first, to my 7th, I ovulate 10 days later than the "normal" woman. Hence, my longer pregnancies. I went to 43wks2days, and she was perfectly FINE! The VBAC went great with the FP that I hadn't seen recently in that practice. HE was a great MW really, because he wasn't like a dr/OB.

My next children were 10 days late (dated at an early U/S), my 4th was on her due date because we "naturally" induced (no cohoshes). BAD IDEA. Evening Primrose Oil internally and orally is good to ripen things up. RRL tea is good to get ctx strong enought, but with all the BH you have had, you WILL have your baby soon. Maybe today, maybe tomorrow.

My first complete UC was 43wks5 days. Biggest baby ever. I had been nursing my 4th throughout the whole pregnancy and was constipated, which probably delayed things. He was PERFECT, the birth went PERFECT, and I was sooo glad that we fired the CNM MW at 32 wks because she would have driven me mad. No transfer with that one.

The next was 43wks2days as well, but we transferred to the hospital for meconium staining. SHe was fine, and all went well with the VBAC. It was out of our comfort zone though. They said we could go back home, since she was fine, but preferred us to stay. No aspiration.

The next baby had a lost twin, and he was only 15 days late. He was born just fine. I did transfer after because I didn't know for sure that it was a twin birth, as I knew there was only one baby. I expect I won't go so far over this time either, since we lost another twin.

Many first time vag births are late. That is just way it is. Some babies like to gestate longer. IT sounds like your baby is fine for now. Just do daily kick counts, and keep an eye on things. Yes, your risk is a little increased, but many babies over the millinea didn't have "due dates", and did just fine. Did your mother have a habit of going overdue? That makes a difference too. Kymberli

[U-Turn]

You know, I had no idea that going over 42 weeks was actually not such a crazy, strange thing! It's very comforting to hear that people do it and everything is fine.

That is interesting about nursing and being overdue. That certainly could be contributing too...and, I've been fairly constipated lately too. In fact, I had just been toying with trying to get things moving better, wondering if it wasn't holding up the show!

And, yes, in fact, my mom DID go over with me...20 days! She is not alive now to verify that, but I remember her telling me that once. What goes around, comes around, eh?

Thanks so much for all the help and encouragement!!

[cottonwood]

Inducing with blue cohosh: http://currantsandspice.fateback.com/induction.html

10-month mamas: http://birthlove.cyclzone.com/pages/ten_month_mama.html

[mwherbs]

here are 2 good/ researched articles on blue cohosh -
Paul's is mainly historic but also clear about not dosing with capsules -

http://medherb.com/Materia_Medica/Ca...on_a_fetus.htm


---------------
and this is one published in the Canadian Journal of Clinical Pharmacology- they have free full text available to read

http://www.cjcp.ca/hm/

the blue cohosh safety in pregnancy is this article specifically-
they also have several other articles on the safety of herbs in pregnancy and breastfeeding-
2008 Winter;15(1):e66-73. Epub 2008 Jan 18.

[fruitfulmomma]

10-month mamas: http://birthlove.cyclzone.com/pages/ten_month_mama.html

Thx for posting this. I am another 10-month mama. My cycles are kind of wonky and I do bf through pregnancy, so I never know exactly but my only "on time" baby was my oldest at 40.5 and then my girls were all between 1 and 3 weeks later than that.

With my last one, it was so crazy because both the ultrasound, at close to 44 weeks, and one of my midwives, just after birth, estimated her to be 39 weeks gestationally. She was covered with a thick coating of vernix. But I absolutely know from when I had my first appointment, which was at least a week after I tested positive, that she was at a minimum of 41 weeks.

[BroodyWoodsgal]

Originally Posted by BoringTales

42 weeks would be my personal limit, and if I'd had a prior C I'd want to try a foley induction as opposed to using any of the labor inducing drugs. For me, going past that would be too much like playing russian roulette with a healthy, term baby. I'm very anti-induction for healthy non-complicated pregnancies in general, but at some point you have to consider just what you are risking for your ideal birth experience.

Good luck in your decision making process and I hope its all for not and you go into labor on your own soon!!

Wow...really, Russian Roulette? Is that really the language you would use? Because it seems really strong, TBH....strong and a bit crazy, when you consider the options as far as induction is concerned....foley induction even seems to be a bigger "risk" than waiting it out....pitocin and al lthat jazz, EXTREMELY risky as compared....considering this woman is a VBAC....I'd say her BEST bet is to wait this out...baby is fine, baby is not the reason she is worried..she is worried, due to the persistent myth that some magical, dangerous change takes place at exactly 42weeks and that, quite suddenly, you are no longer a woman wanting a natural and more gentle birth for your child...but instead, become a crazy person, hell bent on playing "russian roulette" with your babys life! Going past 42weeks...is just as good a reason to be induced as "huge baby syndrome"...also known as "anything larger than 6 pounds". Ugh.



Anyway...OP.....darling...if you feel something is WRONG, you need to listen to that feeling...but with a happy, active baby with good heart tones and a mama who is not feeling any signs of danger...I'd say you are right on track! With your previous births being inductions...we have no idea how long you really bake your babies, you know? Left alone to bake 'em....you could've gone past 42weeks every time..in which case you wouldn't be the least bit worried now, because you would know that you are a longer gestator(is that a word?).

"Due" dates are just as arbitrary as "too late" dates. These dates, these lengths of time in which our body NEEDS (according to the med community) to have completed the process of readying our babes for the world...these are lengths of time set by MAN! Not nature. Most MWs who are out of their comfort zones past that mark...are only uncomfortable due to insurance risk, etc...really. Our bodies are all different...each and every one of us are chemically different people. The process of preparing our bodies and our babies for birth is so complicated...every moment, OP, your body is undertaking this task, even when you don't feel it or see outward sings. For us, it feels like waiting...like a wait that may never end....but inside, your body is a hoppin' joint right now...as evidenced by your lovely contractions and other signs that you are SO close.

So long as you remain comfortable...feeling as though everything is fine with the baby, sounds to me like you're right on track. For me, personally, I wouldn't seek care, simply for moving past the 42w mark. It is just SOOO arbitrary...really, if by 42w your baby isn't quite ready...that would seem to me, to be even MORE reason NOT to induce...if s/he's not ready, s/he's simply NOT ready, you know?

Good luck....I really think you sound soooo close and, like a PP said..I'm guessing you're going to have a quick and intense birth...it seems like your body is doing TONS of prep work and I think when you are ready to go...your gonna GO!

Good for you honey....it seems like you are really using your head and intuition here...as long as that baby stays "happy"....I'd say this is perfect, just the way it needs to be! I don't envy you, my sweet, I only went to 41w1d...and I literally thought, that my baby was never, EVER going to come out of me. Somehow, when you are in those final days....it's SO hard to see that light at the end of the tunnel...then, WOOOSH! Out they come...and you find yourself thinking some time later "whoa, 48 hours ago I had a baby in me still...that seems like WEEKS ago!" - when we're in those last days/hours....it feels like time is streeeetching out so slow...then, baby comes and all the sudden time is FLYINNNG and days pass like seconds!!

Soon, my lady, soooooooooon.

[gossamerwindweb]

Originally Posted by AverysMomma

Wow...really, Russian Roulette? Is that really the language you would use? Because it seems really strong, TBH....

I thought the same. It would be like playing russian roulette IF the gun had 1,000 chambers and there was only one bullet.

I have been reading the book Pushed... which I highly recommend, btw. But the risk of having a stillborn before 41 weeks is .5 in 1000. The risk after 41 weeks is 1 in 1,000 and doesn't continue to rise .... so again, the risk is really not significantly higher. 1,000 chamber gun with 1 bullet. Before 41 weeks, 2,000 chamber gun with 1 bullet. Still not very likely before or after.

Anyhow, again, highly recommend the book Pushed. It is seriously showing me in a very academic manner (in other words not 'hokey' or 'spiritual') what the REAL risks are and how much we have all been lied to for years and years by the medical community.

[gossamerwindweb]

About the blue cohosh links I would like to point out.. a heart DEFECT is different than a cardiac toxicity to an herb. So I still believe I am correct about the defect not being caused by blue cohosh unless it was used early in pregnancy. Now, if the baby had a toxicity or an arrhythmia, etc. after birth... that totally could be from the cohosh (apparently.. I haven't ever seen those studies before)

[BroodyWoodsgal]

Originally Posted by gossamerwindweb

I thought the same. It would be like playing russian roulette IF the gun had 1,000 chambers and there was only one bullet.

I have been reading the book Pushed... which I highly recommend, btw. But the risk of having a stillborn before 41 weeks is .5 in 1000. The risk after 41 weeks is 1 in 1,000 and doesn't continue to rise .... so again, the risk is really not significantly higher. 1,000 chamber gun with 1 bullet. Before 41 weeks, 2,000 chamber gun with 1 bullet. Still not very likely before or after.

Anyhow, again, highly recommend the book Pushed. It is seriously showing me in a very academic manner (in other words not 'hokey' or 'spiritual') what the REAL risks are and how much we have all been lied to for years and years by the medical community.

This is why I took issue with the language...because, inevitably, the imagery that comes to mind is of a person holding a partially loaded gun and pulling the trigger, like "oh well, hope this works out!" - that is poisonous imagery and especially counterproductive on a thread where a UC mama is second guessing herself..as she moves into unknown territory....

The fact is, decision making like this is so far from pulling the trigger on a partially loaded gun, it's not even comparible. The facts are the facts....and the facts clearly outline a much much smaller risk than the medical community would have us believe...and, to be honest...I would even doubt those numbers in the book, for the fact that I'm sure that more than a few midwives/mamas have "fudged dates" so as not to raise a fuss when they went far past what a doctor or insurance company would have been comfy with...also, it doesn't take into account the number of mamas who had trouble in labor or delivered stillborns BECAUSE of interventions that came into play after a CP got spooked at going past the magical 42 week mark...so, really, even in the small, small risk that is outlined for us, how many of those situations where risk factors came into play are even relevant to a situation like THIS one...where baby is obviously happy, mama is caring very well for herself, etc...? You know?

It's like when women FREAK over lysteria(sp) risk and think they can't eat ANY soft cheeses, deli goods, etc...these women don't seem to realize that they have an ACTUAL risk that is significantly higher, of being involved in a fatal car accident on the way to the store, than they do of actually suffering fetal loss or injury due to contracting lysteria from deli meat or soft cheese...as if it's even possible to GET unpastuerized cheese this side of the Atlantic anymore...ugh. The medical and political communities in this country thrive off of many things....the most potent, profitable and undying of all: Fear. We need to examine where our fear of things, where our knowledge base ABOUT these things we fear, come from....they don't come from our inate knowledge of self, they are not inuitive....they are PLANTED.

We need to stop being so afraid....

[BroodyWoodsgal]

Originally Posted by gossamerwindweb

About the blue cohosh links I would like to point out.. a heart DEFECT is different than a cardiac toxicity to an herb. So I still believe I am correct about the defect not being caused by blue cohosh unless it was used early in pregnancy. Now, if the baby had a toxicity or an arrhythmia, etc. after birth... that totally could be from the cohosh (apparently.. I haven't ever seen those studies before)

Yeah...an actual defect would form much earlier in the pregnancy than a woman would be taking cohosh to being ctx....but I don't have any actual information about the issue of toxicity...that is an interesting new thing for me to research, I'd never heard anything like that....I actually took B&B cohosh during my own labor when things petered out....hhmmm

[gossamerwindweb]

Originally Posted by AverysMomma

This is why I took issue with the language...because, inevitably, the imagery that comes to mind is of a person holding a partially loaded gun and pulling the trigger, like "oh well, hope this works out!" - that is poisonous imagery and especially counterproductive on a thread where a UC mama is second guessing herself..as she moves into unknown territory....

You are right, that IS poisonous imagery. My issue was more 'people will instantly think of a 6 chambered gun with 1 bullet. If you think of 1,000 chambers with only one bullet... spinning the wheel it isn't quite so dangerous. LOL! Like playing wheel of fortune with 999 money wedges and one bankrupt. The chances of hitting bankrupt are extremely low. LOL! However, I definitely agree with you on the language

[BoringTales]

I specifically said in my post that for ME, it would carry to big of a risk. Everyone makes their own risk assessments, obviously. I, personally, couldn't live with myself if the worst happened and there was something I could've done about it with a full-term baby.

Originally Posted by gossamerwindweb

I thought the same. It would be like playing russian roulette IF the gun had 1,000 chambers and there was only one bullet.

I have been reading the book Pushed... which I highly recommend, btw. But the risk of having a stillborn before 41 weeks is .5 in 1000. The risk after 41 weeks is 1 in 1,000 and doesn't continue to rise .... so again, the risk is really not significantly higher. 1,000 chamber gun with 1 bullet. Before 41 weeks, 2,000 chamber gun with 1 bullet. Still not very likely before or after.

Anyhow, again, highly recommend the book Pushed. It is seriously showing me in a very academic manner (in other words not 'hokey' or 'spiritual') what the REAL risks are and how much we have all been lied to for years and years by the medical community.

She asked at what point would you give up. I answered. I don't appreciate being attacked because my choice would be different than your choice. Every day the baby is still inside me is another day that chances a IUFD. That can't happen if the baby is on the outside. I'd rather take on the added risk to ME of an induction at 42 weeks than pass on the risk of a IUFD to the baby.

Note....notice please this is only MY personal opinion and what I would do and MY personal reasoning behind it. Its not a judgment, or a suggestion of what anyone ELSE should do...

[flapjack]

Originally Posted by gossamerwindweb

I thought the same. It would be like playing russian roulette IF the gun had 1,000 chambers and there was only one bullet.

I have been reading the book Pushed... which I highly recommend, btw. But the risk of having a stillborn before 41 weeks is .5 in 1000. The risk after 41 weeks is 1 in 1,000 and doesn't continue to rise .... so again, the risk is really not significantly higher. 1,000 chamber gun with 1 bullet. Before 41 weeks, 2,000 chamber gun with 1 bullet. Still not very likely before or after.

Anyhow, again, highly recommend the book Pushed. It is seriously showing me in a very academic manner (in other words not 'hokey' or 'spiritual') what the REAL risks are and how much we have all been lied to for years and years by the medical community.

Those aren't the statistics I've seen. I've always heard 1:1000 at 40 weeks, 3:1000 at 43 weeks and nobody is entirely sure what the growth curve is in between. The studies are varying greatly. Yes, the odds are in your favour, but it's still a gamble.

Averysmomma, gently, the OP is facing a tough decision and also has another risk factor to contend with. I don't think that using language that could be designed to make her fearful of doctors or medical professionals is going to help at this stage in the game. There isn't an enemy here.

[gossamerwindweb]

Originally Posted by flapjack

Those aren't the statistics I've seen. I've always heard 1:1000 at 40 weeks, 3:1000 at 43 weeks and nobody is entirely sure what the growth curve is in between. The studies are varying greatly. Yes, the odds are in your favour, but it's still a gamble.

Perhaps I have been hanging around my husband too much. LOL! He is a great one for statistics. So again I think to myself... even if it IS 3 out of 1,000 at 43 weeks, that is 997 positive outcomes and 3 negatives. 997 empty chambers, 3 bullets... or 997 money slots and 3 bankrupts. The likelihood is still just VERY low.

Originally Posted by BoringTales

She asked at what point would you give up. I answered. I don't appreciate being attacked because my choice would be different than your choice. Every day the baby is still inside me is another day that chances a IUFD. That can't happen if the baby is on the outside. I'd rather take on the added risk to ME of an induction at 42 weeks than pass on the risk of a IUFD to the baby.

I hope you didn't feel that I was attacking you. That was the furthest thing from my mind and I am sorry if I came across that way. I believe any mother has to make her own decision and if yours would be to induce, that is your decision and no one should judge it! If others feel induction is more risk than not, they shouldn't be judged either. My only point was that the risk is still very low in general. If you, personally, have other issues that compound your risk, obviously that is a different story.

Honestly I just don't know how I would feel if I went that far over. I am crossing my fingers that I don't find out honestly

[BroodyWoodsgal]

Originally Posted by flapjack

<snip>

Averysmomma, gently, the OP is facing a tough decision and also has another risk factor to contend with. I don't think that using language that could be designed to make her fearful of doctors or medical professionals is going to help at this stage in the game. There isn't an enemy here.

I appreciate your tone...and I agree. My language wasn't in any way, intentionally designed to that effect, I'm sorry if it came across that way, OP. I was a bit upset by the toxic language used by another poster, it's possible that colored my own response some. In any case...you are right, no enemy...aside, perhaps, from fear mongering and skewed facts based on emotional response to the thought of a baby in "danger"...both of which serve *only* to muddy the waters and make logical decision making harder...and both which seem to push their way into questions like the one at hand, without fail.