Originally Posted by Spring Lily
One of my babies had a complication and the c-section saved her life, but I do believe I would have gone full term otherwise, no signs of cervical change at 34wks. I've never heard that 35 weeks is the expected term for twins, I've always heard it's typically 38-39 weeks.
Some docs consider 36 weeks to be term. I asked the repro endo about this, and his staff said that 40 weeks is term "even" for twins! One thing I've heard/read is that 50% of twins are born by 37 weeks.
Originally Posted by nummies
I think that it really is helpful for those of us who are currently pregnant with twins to see both sides of the spectrum here. It does give me comfort to see so many babies born at or near term. However, it also gives me comfort that sometimes, even with mamas do everything "right", that babies do just come early. That is comforting to for me to know that it won't be anything that I did "wrong". So thanks to everyone for sharing their experiences.
Ditto! I find this all very encouraging and somewhat surprising. I assumed that most twins born in the hospital before 36 weeks would have been born via c/s, for example.
Originally Posted by OGirlieMama
I don't know if it's just a lack of clarity in the writing or what. But it does sound like the OP is suggesting that preterm labor and birth in multiples may be caused by medical mismanagement and that if we were all just left alone, we'd go full term.
That's not really how I took it. And really, as applied to twins especially, the term "elective cesarean" is misleading. To me this indicates that a woman was planning a cesarean from the start. Maybe so, but if so, why? More than likely because her doctor thought it was in her babies' best interest. So is that really elective?
I do think that women who aren't getting pressured after 36 weeks by their CPs are more likely to go to term. But often we have the "you'll need to schedule" threat being made in late term. Too much stimulation of the sympathetic nervous system can certainly delay labor!
And then in my case . . . 38 weeks and both babes are breech. Homebirth isn't an option in my state for twins (or breech).
: And OBs in this community just don't "do" vagi breech. My OBs malpractice insurance doesn't cover him for breech even though he did vagi breech back in the day. If I end up with a c/s, is that elective?
I wonder when i'll be able to answer these questions. I'm just waiting for something interesting to happen, lol!
1 - I'll have to go to the hospital to birth these babies; if baby A is vertex I'll be "allowed" to vagi birth in the OR
2 - I'll be 38 weeks tomorrow. It's interesting because earlier in my pregnancy, my OB said he'd want to schedule a c/s at (or was it after) 39 weeks. I think because I've had such a healthy pregnancy, and he's actually trying to give my babies time to gestate and possibly even turn back vertex, he's not pressuring me to schedule at 39 weeks or 40 weeks or anything, at this point. I'm kind of amazed.
3 - He will NOT medically induce a VBAC, not that I'd consent to it anyway. There will also be NO augmentation (except perhaps if a bit of pit is necessary to try and help turn a breech B). I don't know if he'd want to pit me under any circumstances.
4 - My OB will elect
for me to have a c/s if both babies remain breech. And if A comes out vaginally vertex but B stays persistently breech, I'll get sectioned. I'm not going to be able to fight this.
5 - How am I going to feel about all of this - dunno, ask me in a few weeks. It's been pretty stressful. I HATE that no one in Western Montana does vaginal breech. It's out of SOP for the homebirth midwives, and the OBs just don't do it.
6 - according to u/s, my babies have been keeping up with singletons in terms of size.
7 - I'm assuming fraternal - 2 girls in seperate sacs with seperate placentas.