or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Parenting Multiples › What route were your twins/multiples born by?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What route were your twins/multiples born by?

Poll Results: What route did you give birth by?

 
  • 55% (30)
    All babies vaginally
  • 31% (17)
    All babies by cesearean
  • 7% (4)
    one+ baby vaginally AND one+ baby by cesearean
  • 5% (3)
    obligatory other? (time travel?)
54 Total Votes  
post #1 of 32
Thread Starter 
First off, sorry to all the seasoned Moms here who probably get sick and tired of the pg newbies asking the same questions over and over You're all doing a great job initiating me and I fully appreciate all the words of wisdom. I assume there's already a thread about this somewhere, but it was a daunting forum search...

Anyway, what I'm wondering is simply how did you birth your twins/multiples, vaginally or by cesarean?

I'm asking, mostly, bc it is a nagging question in my head but, also, bc I'm really undecided on my birth options and, in interviewing a million careproviders, I'm hearing figures all over the place from everyone I talk to...

I know a sample from a MDC forum is hardly scientific, but it is what I want- an intentionally biased sample group, women presumably somewhat similar to me in lifestyle (educated, well nourished, healthy, natural leaning)

So, if you wouldn't mind...
Feel free to add any details of your birth circumstances that may have led to delivery route choice (or necessity).

TIA.
post #2 of 32
I'm sorry, I voted, saw it on the main page and I didn't realize it was in parenting multiples, which I don't have! I ruined your poll
post #3 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaxinator View Post
I'm sorry, I voted, saw it on the main page and I didn't realize it was in parenting multiples, which I don't have! I ruined your poll
oops! same here.

But I do know several moms w/ twins

2 sets were born vaginally, 1 set on her due date, and the other close to her due date.

Another mother had a c-section for her twins; she also had a c-section w/ her first born 7 yrs prior.
post #4 of 32
Both my boys were born vaginally. Baby A was head down for a long time leading into birth and stayed ther to be born. Baby B was transverse as his brother came out but slid right on down head first once brother was out. Baby B flipped around a lot in the final weeks, even going complete breech at 36.5 weeks. They were born at 37.5 weeks.

FWIW, I delivered with a Kaiser MW in the OR of the local hospital birth center. The OB and anesthesiologist stood in the corner and waited, just in case.
post #5 of 32
I can't figure out how to vote but mine were C section (emergency). I developed pre-e. However they were a scheduled C anyway following two back surgeries and a myloectomy. My OB didn't want to risk rupture but the emergency C came first.

Best wishes,
Gabrielle

Mommy to Franklin & Callan
post #6 of 32
I had mine vaginally, but it was a continual battle with the medical folk. Once I healthily reached 35 weeks, I stopped going to see the doctors and just worked with a midwife and did HB.
post #7 of 32
Mine were c-section. I had done the research, found an ob who was supportive of natural birth, no OR laboring, etc., but I ended up in the hospital for high blood pressure. On the second day, my BP spiked to 212/120 with high protein and signs of HELLP in my blood tests. The babies were not responding and their heart rates were dropping low. We ended going in for a emergency c-section.

I do believe in most cases, you can have twins vaginally. Mine was an extreme case of what can go wrong, but the chances of it happening are pretty low.

But, I do wish I had researched and prepared for the possibility of a c-section. And also about the NICU. I don't believe that looking into it is damaging to your confidence to prepare for the possibility. I was so lost the first week afterwards. A little preparation and research would have helped me advocate for myself and my babies earlier.

There is no need to get obsessive, or think it is an inevitable thing, though.
post #8 of 32
My twins both came by planned c-section. I was a c-section candidate for a lot of reasons. I would have been VBACing, for starters. Then I developed cholestasis, early in the third trimester. At that time, the evidence was in favor of induction by 37 weeks, for cholestasis, because of the high incidence of stillbirth at term. A VBAC induction with twins, way before my body was really ready for labor, was just too risky for even my comfort level, particularly in view of the fact that I have a congenital heart condition. It poses no risk to me or the babies, but it does tend to act up during labor and scare everybody.

So c-section it was, and I was at peace with that decision.

DS (my twin B) was transverse, too. But I don't think that would have mattered-- DD2 (twin A) was very well-positioned, and the attitude seemed to be that vaginal birth would have been fine with everybody involved, if I hadn't been a VBAC candidate.
post #9 of 32
I had a homebirth, so both vaginally for me.
post #10 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by JenChaffee View Post
I had mine vaginally, but it was a continual battle with the medical folk. Once I healthily reached 35 weeks, I stopped going to see the doctors and just worked with a midwife and did HB.
Me too, except I stuck with my docs until 37 weeks. Figured after that if I needed to transfer, the practice wouldn't know the difference.

The only reason I had mine vaginally (at 39w to the day) is that we stayed home. The twins were my first, I went late and labored long. Would have been bullied, induced and FTP at a hospital. The hospital near me has an 80% twin c/s rate according to the L&D RN I talked to. Knew I'd fight tooth and nail to hope to be in that 20%, and probably couldn't do it.

Not all hospitals and docs are as conservative as those in my area, but you have to look long and hard for an OB to support natural twin birth. Very few have EVER seen one.
post #11 of 32
My ds was born vaginally and then I underwent an emergency c-section to deliver dd who was stuck transverse. That along with the placenta abrupting and me hemmoraging combined to make the c-section necessary.

My OB was perfectly happy with me having a vaginal birth for both but it was not to be.
post #12 of 32
A was vertex and B was breech, so I had a vaginal delivery planned. A ended up having complications that put her life at risk and I had to have an early emergency c-section. Had there been no complications, we would have gone with the vaginal delivery.

My OB & I had agreed that she'd place the epidural line but I wouldn't be hooked up. I'd try for a natural birth and then if any complications arose or I got too exhausted or whatever, the line would already be placed so they could do c/s if any emergencies arose. I think it was a good compromise and was comfortable with the plan. Some OBs would not have allowed me to try a natural birth with one breech, so I think a lot of your options have to do with who your healthcare provider is and whether they have much twin experience.
post #13 of 32
Born vaginally. One head down, one breech. For the breech baby, they pulled her out because her heart rate was dropping.
post #14 of 32
C/s here. Older ds was a c/s and I was going for a natural birth with the twins but b/c my pelvis is misshaped, I can't have a vaginal birth. I ended in a c/s with my twins too.
post #15 of 32
Both of mine were born vaginally. Baby A was head down, B was transverse on delivery day. Once A was out, the dr. did a quick and gentle external version and then ruptured her membranes to hold her in place. It worked, and out she came a few minutes later. I was 37 weeks, 5 day, went into labor on my own, and they came home with us the next day. Basically my dream situation for a twin birth.
post #16 of 32
mine were vaginal. easiest of all my labors, actually.

yes, you have to be a staunch advocate, though, if you have to see an OB. my girlfriend had twins 10 days before mine, and she was offered a c-section even though everything was normal an the babies were head down. she had one, and they even took them early for no reason. it is insane really.

i think if i were to have another set, i would pay extra to have a midwife (our insurance does not cover midwife for twins) and avoid all that bologna.
post #17 of 32
I think it depends on your OB. Mine told me I *could* have an elective c-section if I wanted b/c there was the risk that I would end up delivering one vaginally and then having a c-section for the second. I told him I would take the risk, and a c-section was never mentioned again. I didn't have to fight in the least for my vag. birth. He also never mentioned taking them early unless there was a solid medical reason. In fact, he gave me advice on how to keep them in longer.

Also, my ob walked over to the hospital once he knew I was in labor and hand picked my nurse for me, making sure I got one who supported natural childbirth, no vax, etc. She in turn snagged me the water birthing room and hovered over the nursery person after the birth making sure my babes didn't get any meds. My babes were put on my chest right after birth, and Baby A nursed immediatley to get contrax started again. After the birth, my nurse advised me that they often do a blood sugar check but that I could refuse it - in a way that actually subtly encouraged me to refuse it (which I would have done anyway.)

When baby B had problems nursing overnight, the nurse on duty helped me hand express colostrum and give it to her in a dropper. Bottles and formula were never mentioned. Oh, and the hospital didn't give out formula samples either, because it is so counterproductive. Overall, an awesome experience. The only person I had to fight was the phlebotomist, who didn't want to do the heel stick while I was nursing, because it was inconvenient for her.
post #18 of 32
Mine were C/S, and my first child, DS1 was natural V with a hospital midwife. This time I had midwives and an OB, and wanted a home birth if possible. At 34 weeks, the midwives said no to the home birth because of baby A's position. At the end, both babies were breech, and baby A's position (not quite breech, almost transverse) put him at risk of cord prolapse if I waited for my water to break. I never felt I was in labor, just kind of achy, but that was enough for me to get checked out. Turns out I was already dilated 7cm at almost 35 weeks gestation, though not having regular contractions. The babies were born via C/S that night. We booked some time in the NICU because they were premature, but now both are super healthy at 7 months old!
post #19 of 32
mine were c section at 35w3d because an ultrasound found that baby a had a VERY short cord (6 inches) and labor could be dangerous. not what i intended but i am just happy both babies are safe and sound.
post #20 of 32
Mine were born very premature, at 29 weeks. Baby A was born vaginally, and Baby B got into a bad position (folded it in half, head down but feet down next to head) and started having decels, so she was born via medically-necessary-though-not-exactly-emergent (they don't take a lot of chances at that gestational age) c-section.

Recovery sucked a whole lot, but I would not have given up the opportunity to have even the one vaginal birth even if you told me it would work out the same way again.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting Multiples
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Parenting Multiples › What route were your twins/multiples born by?