Would you LIE to your Midwife or OB about your LMP?

[filiadeluna]

I am curious to see what everyone's views are on this...  Long story short:  With baby #1 I was induced at 42 weeks by a Certified Nurse Midwife in a hospital, with no signs of issues with amniotic fluid, the placenta, or otherwise.  I was given Cytotec and Pitocin, and had a posterior baby.  It was a very traumatic 36 hour labor that ended in a 3rd degree tear, some hemorraging, and postpartum depression.  I am determined to have a home birth when I get pregnant with #2.  I thought this would solve ALL of my issues, but apparently even the homebirth midwives around here transfer care anywhere from 41 to 42 weeks (there may be one who "lets" people go to 43, but I'm not sure).  Personally, I do not feel that my baby was ready at 42 weeks, even though I am sure of when she was conceived.  I feel strongly that my next baby is likely to come later also, and I'm comfortable with waiting beyond 43 weeks as long as there are no obvious signs of issues.  I will NOT be induced again.  I refuse.  I am extremely fearful of giving birth in a hospital again, and I'm afraid that I will spend all this time and money with a midwife and then end up being risked-out simply due to a time limit.  If that happens, I would probably just not show up for induction.  Maybe even consider an unassisted birth, although I am not entirely comfortable with that, and I know my DH wouldn't be comfortable with that at all.  I'm tempted, when I do get pregnant, to lie to my midwife about when my last period was (add a week or two).  A friend of mine whom I mentioned this to said that she wouldn't do it simply because they wouldn't automatically start doing Non-Stress Testing when I might actually "need" it.  What would you do in my situation?  I just need to figure this out BEFORE I get pregnant, so that I can stick with a plan.  Thanks!

[mamapigeon]

I don't think I would be able to lie... I can understand why you would want to with your past experience, but if you are convinced you won't induce, then what does it matter if you tell the truth about the date of your LMP? I don't think they can force you to induce? 

[kriket]

I don't think I would in that case, but I would be very very firm that I would remain pregnant forever before being induced just because my number was up.

I do "lie" to some HCPs about my LMP, I have 35 day periods and as to not appear a week more pregnant.

It's hard to say if #2 will be late too. I've heard the first always bakes the longest.

[treeoflife3]

yes, I would consider lying if I felt the person I had to use at the birth (because if it were a choice, this wouldn't be a concern) would push hard/try to require that I birth before I feel my body is ready rather than just monitoring and letting my body do its own thing unless/until something seems to be going wrong.

[AlexisT]

No. I would, however, adjust LMP to match ovulation dates, if known.  

If you lie by that much, your midwife is going to get suspicious when your baby's size doesn't match the dates. 2 weeks would result in a noticeable discrepancy. Not getting an early ultrasound will allow for some ambiguity, but not 2 weeks' worth.

[Bald_Bull's_Mama]

Originally Posted by AlexisT 

No. I would, however, adjust LMP to match ovulation dates, if known.  

Yes to this. I adjusted my LMP to go with my known O date with this baby. I would just be VERY clear with your provider that you will not be doing an induction for non-medical reasons. Would it help you to interview some providers before you get pregnant? Have you posted in the tribe area here to find a more supportive provider?

I know our local CNMs have to transfer care at 42 weeks (liability insurance, I assume), but the OB that backs them up is not an induction pusher.

[Lisa1970]

I have used fertility treatments with my last few children so I knew exactly when I ovulated. But I found that OBs office will ask you your LMP and even if that puts your due date off by months, they put it in there anyway. It drives me nuts. I had where I had a baby at 23.5 weeks and got pregnant again before I got my period back. But the nurse insisted on writing my due date down as if I were pregnant since before my preemie who died! That was not just nuts, but it was hurtful having her constantly tell me I was due in March, when my baby that was due in March had died, and I was not even due until September! I decided after that to just take the date I ovulated, go back 2 weeks, and give that as my LMP. Then I do not have to stress over it.

[kalamos23]

I adjust to match my ovulation date, but had a similar experience when I got pregnant directly after a m/c with this baby, I told them my lmp was in may, but that I had am/c and got pregnant directly after and they still say mylmp is in between when I was bleeding from the m/c and my ovulation, even though ikeep telling them itwas not an lmp.

So in short, yes but only to match ovulation.

[Evergreen]

I fudged a bit with one of mine. I said I couldn't remember the LPM ( I did) but knew the date of conception (which was true.) It all worked out.

[FiveLittleMonkeys]

Like other posters, I would do it so it lined up with a known date of ovulation.  If you lied about LMP by 2 weeks, making you seem 2 weeks LESS pregnant than you actually were, this could come back to bite you in the rear the other way if your baby was to decide to come at say, 37 weeks by YOUR actual dates, but your midwife/HCP thinks your baby is only 35 weeks.  In many states, a midwife can't deliver until at least 36 weeks, and some it's 37.  So you'd know that you're really 37 weeks, but all she knows is by the dates YOU gave, your baby is 35....and therefore, she has to risk you out.

I would just line it up with your ovulation date and choose your providers as carefully as you can.

[artekah]

Absolutely YES, no qualms about it whatsoever, but as PPs have said, only to make it 2 weeks before your ovulation date. I happen to know I conceived my current baby-in-utero on day 21 of my cycle, so I just subtracted 14 days from conception to get my fake (but more accurate as far as they're concerned) LMP.

If I was unsure about when I conceived, I'd probably tell them my actual LMP (since this is why they go by LMP in the first place, because they assume most women couldn't possibly know when they conceived--so I suppose it does make sense to go by LMP if that's the only info you have.)

In your case I'd try very hard to find a care provider who understands and respects that some normal, healthy pregnancies can go up to or beyond 42 weeks!

[mmaramba]

IDK...  With the "next" PG being my first...  There's no history in my family of preemies/pre-dates babies like AT ALL, but plenty going to 42-44 weeks.  If I didn't know my ovulation date but did know my LMP and were facing a situation like you (HB MW won't attend after 42 weeks, which I think will be the case-- *sigh*)...  I might lie by a week.  Especially given it will be my first and going to 42-43 is still within the bell curve.  I wouldn't lie by more than a week, but I might do a week, especially if 42 weeks is a hard legal line as I suspect it might be.  I have considered this and I think that's where I fall, personally.

[kriket]

For some reason I can't quote... lesigh. AlexisT mentioned 2 weeks is enough to notice, I would disagree. My LMP puts this PGcy at EDD 7/14 but an early U/S confirmed my educated guess of EDD 7/21, then the 20w U/S put my EDD (if they did it this way, mine don't change it, I have heard some do, but I think that's a touch silly) at 6/29.

I think it boils down to you need to have a HCP that you can be totally honest with.

[tracymom1]

My advice is to find a DEM or other type of hands-off type midwife that does not rely on LMP only for accurate dating.  Try to find someone who trusts you and your body to make the best decisions for when your little one is ready to enter this world.  My DEM from my last pregnancy had delivered babies that were supposedly 44 weeks but came out looking like your average full-term infant - so she knows that dates are just dates and babies are going to come when they are ready.  Maybe check out the Finding Your Tribe forums and see if there is anyone more in tune with how you feel.

Also, if you want to avoid a medical induction, there are a lot of things you can do to stimulate labor once you reach your due date - frequent intercourse, nipple stimulation, EPO (which you can start any time after you reach term), etc...

If you don't want to get caught up in the conventional medical model of pregnancy, then you need to avoid those kinds of care providers.  

[Smokering]

I don't think it's fair to a HCP to give her inaccurate information - and, as a PP said, it could backfire if you gave birth at nearly 39 weeks and your MW thought it was nearly 37. (In NZ 37 weeks is the earliest MWs are legally allowed to attend a homebirth - 36 weeks 6 days, you risk out.) A MW and her client should have mutual trust; if you trust her to assist in the delivery of your baby, possibly even to save your lives if something went wrong, it seems only fair to trust her enough to tell her the truth about your pregnancy. I think if I were a MW and had developed a trusting, close relationship with a client, I'd be pretty hurt and aggrieved if she told me "I've just gone into labour, but I'm not really early - I lied to you about my dates before". You know?

I think it's perfectly reasonable to interview a bunch of MWs, though, and say straight out what you said here: "I will not be induced again, I refuse" (making it clear that you mean "for no good reason", not "under any circumstances", as I assume is the case!). If you're particularly paranoid you could even get it in writing from the MW: "I understand that filiadeluna does not wish to be induced based on post-term dates without medical indication; I agree to this and accept her as a client regardless", or something along those lines. Find the right MW and she won't be "the enemy", so hopefully you won't feel the need or inclination to be dishonest with her.

[cappuccinosmom]

No, I don't think that's fair, and unless you're also going to refuse u/s completely, no matter what happens, you might very well be found out anyway.  

I like smokering's advice.  That is what I would do.  Actually, I offered to sign something for the doctor who was "overseeing" my birth once I passed the limits to deliver at the birth center.  She admitted her fears were based on liability issues, and not on any real reason for me or the baby individually.  She didn't give me any papers to sign, but she did shut up after that. lol  I delivered two babies at 42 w 3 days.

[~~Sarah~~]

Yes. I have in the past and would again if the situation called for it. Frankly one week or ten days difference is never going to make a care provider suspicious, but can give you a serious break at the end. I was transfered in labor with my first baby - I really believe that had the hospital known that I was more than ten days past my EDD I would have been treated differently. Frankly, I narrowly avoided a c/section and I'm convinced that my EDD lie was one of the things that saved me.

Many care providers believe that it is normal to go past 42 weeks, but have laws and protocols that get in the way of being able to practice in harmony with that belief. When you are looking for a care provider - ask about that too. Also, in a transfer situation - even if you have the most understanding mw, if you are "past dates" you may be treated like you are on fire.

Where I live there are entire communities that habitually lie to their doctors regarding LMP...

[lovebeingamomma]

I wouldn't be comfortable seeing a midwife I felt I had to lie to.  If I didn't want an NST, I would just tell them no thanks.

[CBEmomma]

No I wouldn't lie.

[AutumnAir]

Yup - I would and I did.  Good thing too, since DD1 was born at 43+1 weeks and DD2 at 43+6 weeks.  Very glad I did and in my situation it was definitely the best choice I could have made.