So this whole engagement thing...

[babycatcher12]

So I'm wondering about engaging before birth. Most of the time it sounds like first time moms engage earlier and some moms (especially if they've had multiple pregnancies) don't engage until labor starts.

This might be a dumb question, but what if you've never had a vaginal birth before? I'm wondering because I'm expecting baby #4, but have never had a vaginal birth (planning one this time). I did dilate and push for 3 hours with DS #1. I'm just curious if I should *expect* this baby to engage first (like a first timer) or start labor first.

What were yours like? Input? Thanks!

[kitkat5505]

None of my babies were engaged before labor.

[TifosiGirl]

I think only first time Moms experience lightening and from what I understand, it's because their muscles aren't prepared like Moms on their second or more. I would imagine that if you dilated and pushed with your first then he was likely at a + station and quite engaged! I can't imagine you would with this one until you went into labor...?

[AnneCordelia]

It depends on the mama. I engaged at 35 weeks with #1 and had him vaginally at 42 weeks. I have had all my babies engage before labour...even this baby now is partially engaged at 37 weeks. But, it's more common for multips to NOT engage before labour starts because your ligaments and muscles are more stretched, is what I understand.

[MammaB21]

Baby #1 and baby #2 both engaged about a week before I went into labor. Baby #2 was much lower the entire pregnancy. He was 'almost' engaged for weeks before birth.

[billikengirl]

My baby (1st and only so far) wasn't at all engaged at my 40 week appointment, and labor started not even 24 hours later. He was at -2 when the midwife arrived and I asked to be checked.

[CherryBomb]

I've never had engagement with any of mine.

[sattygirl99]

Originally Posted by TifosiGirl

I think only first time Moms experience lightening and from what I understand, it's because their muscles aren't prepared like Moms on their second or more. I would imagine that if you dilated and pushed with your first then he was likely at a + station and quite engaged! I can't imagine you would with this one until you went into labor...?

I'm on my 3rd... My first never engaged (c-section for failed induction at 37 weeks), my daughter did engage at 37ish weeks and this one is engaged and has been for several weeks now. I'm 36 weeks tomorrow.

I think it depends on the mama/baby. Engagement means little, as does dilation, before labor.

[katelove]

As some of the PPs have said, the reason first babies tend to engage before labour is because those muscles are tighter and provide more pressure to help the babe get into position. So, as you have been pregnant before, you could expect this LO to not engage until the pressure of contractions during labour helped him/her to get into position.

However, as you can also see from reading this thread, the range of normal is pretty wide so anything could happen

My baby didn't engage at all. When she was finally born by c/s at 41+6 she had never been more than 1/5 descended and could easily be lifted out to 5/5 above.

She does have a beautifully shaped head though